Truth Magazine

By Steve Wolfgang

Footnote, Helen Parmley, “Southern Baptists Rest Paid Ministers,” Lexington Herald-Leader, Oct. 12, 1987, p. A- 1.

DALLAS – Dallas churches pay their senior ministers more than any other city in the country. And the nation’s highest paid minister is a Southern Baptist pastor in Dallas whose total annual compensation is $149,150.

A survey to determine the compensation for people in the ministry or related jobs in 10 American Christian denominations finds that Dallas ministers and Southern Baptist clergy are the best paid in the United States.

The survey ranked Kentucky 12th among the states and Lexington 19th among the cities in the level of pay for senior ministers of all the denominations.

The churches in the Southern Baptist Convention are autonomous, operated independently, like a franchised business. They do not make pastors’ salaries public.

The study finds striking differences among denominations and”regions in the average senior pastor’s total compensations.

Heading the list are Southern Baptists, who pay their senior pastors an average annual package of $50,458. Presbyterians run a close second at $49,934, and Episcopalians are third, with an average of $46,811.

Independent Churches of Christ reported the lowest average – $31,908, with the Nazarenes, at $33,420, and Disciples of Christ at $34,069, second and third from the bot tom, respectively.

The survey also shows that Baptist provisions for their ministers’ retirements are among the lowest.

Disciples were just above the 10 percent level recommended in the study. But along with the Baptists, the United Methodists, the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, Assemblies of God, the Church of Christ and the Nazarenes all were below 10 percent.

Denominationally, Presbyterians, Lutherans and Episcopalians pay well above the average retirement package, at 11 percent of total compensation.

The survey was conducted by the Ministers’ Financial Services Association of Lubbock, Texas. The company gathered information from nearly 1,000 congregations in 10 Christian denominations.

The association examined the full financial package for pastors in the Assemblies of God, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the Episcopal Church, Independent Churches of Christ, Lutheran, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist and United Methodist churches.

The response from Roman Catholics was so small that even though the results were published, they were not considered by those who took the survey to reflect an accurate picture of the compensation received by priests.

Among the 10 denominations, the average compensation package for the senior minister of a church is $42,481. The total includes base salary, housing and utilities allowances, insurance and pension payments and other benefits.

The average pay drops considerably for an associate minister, whose average full compensation is $34,424, and a minister of pre-school education, whose average pay package is $20,789.

Overall, among those surveyed, the second-highest paid church position is that of the minister of music, except in many larger churches, where the second-highest paid staff member is the business administrator.

Michael J. Springer, executive director of the Ministers’ Financial Services Association, said that when compared with the $50,525 median income for people across the nation with graduate education – equivalent to seminary – many ministers “could possibly be significantly underpaid.”

Geographically, the Sun Belt warms up the most to its preachers. In ranking of clergy pay state by state, the survey shows that the South and South Central regions dominate the top of the pay charts.

Fifteen of the top 20 states are in those two regions. Every state in the South Central region except Kansas was in the top 20. Ranked in order, the most generous are Georgia, Mississippi, Florida, Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee, New York, California and North Carolina.

Besides Southern Baptists, in the six-state South Central area of the United States, the highest total compensation for senior ministers of churches are: Christian (Disciples), $64,786; Independent Church of Christ, $48,000; Episcopal, $111,808; Lutheran, $52,549; Methodist, $114,988; Nazarene, $85,962; Pentecostal, $95,280; Presbyterian, $128,992; Roman Catholic, $15,072.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 5, p. 139
March 3, 1988

By Don Martin

A study of different biographies can be most rewarding. The word “biography” is a compound word from the Greek consisting of bio, meaning life and graphe, meaning to write or a writing. Hence “biography” means a writing of someone’s life. I immensely enjoy reading the biography of George Washington Carver. Mr. Carver was born in abject poverty, the son of a slave woman. In his late twenties he struggled to obtain a high school diploma and, when he was thirty four, obtained a degree in agricultural science. In 1894 he received his master of science degree. Thomas Alva Edison is also an inspiring example of overcoming severe handicaps. Edison received less than a year of formal schooling; notwithstanding, he has immeasurably affected and changed the lives of all of us.

Beloved, while there are many excellent biographies to consider I suggest there is one biography which transcends all biographies as far as the quality of the one considered and the contributions which he made to mankind, the man Christ Jesus. “How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power,” Peter states, “who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him” (Acts 10:38).

Jesus Was Obedient

To motivate the Hebrews to a higher and more constant level of obedience, the writer often employed the example of Jesus. Please consider such an instance: “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:8,9). The very essence of Jesus’ life was to obey his Father. He expressed this desire in this manner, “. . my meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work” (John 4:34). Jesus could truthfully say, “for I do always those things that please him” (John 8:29). Jesus “was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). Jesus was obedient – even to the death of the cross (Phil. 2:8).

Partook of Word

Necessarily involved in the acquiescence of Jesus to his Father was his dependency on the word of God. When Jesus taught and engaged in controversy, as he often did, he did not refer to his subjective feelings or to objective sources such as the teachings of the rabbis as his authority. He quoted Scripture (Matt. 19:4-6,8)! When the devil amassed every particle of power and persuasiveness at his disposal to defeat the Lord at the very outset of Jesus’ ministry, the Lord relied on Scripture. After each of the devil’s appeals through the lust of the flesh, pride of life, and the lust of the eyes, Jesus cogently responded: “It is written” (Matt. 4:4,7,10). Jesus believed in the total indispensability of the word. Hear him: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4).

Jesus Desired Unity

In the shadow of the cross, Jesus’ primary concerns were not exclusively for himself. Consider his prayer, “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me” (Jn. 17:21).

Concerned one, Jesus did not believe in nor practice our modern ecumenical unity. Jesus did not place “unity” over truth. In fact, Jesus – because he insisted on truth regardless – often caused division among his brethren (Jn. 10:19). Our Lord, I am convinced, would not be very successful as a modern “Church of Christ Preacher”! Jesus desires unity based on a conformity to the word of God (Jn. 17:8,14,17,19,20).

Jesus Loved Truth

One cannot help but be impressed with the profound love Jesus possessed for the truth. While the religious world, and more and more within the body of Christ, are clamoring for the suppression of truth, or at least parts of truth, Jesus unshackled the truth found in the Hebrew Scriptures and enunciated new, revolutionary truths (Matt. 5:21-48; Jn. 14:6). When in the presence of error, Jesus could not remain silent, even though such outspokenness would later cost him his life (Jn. 8:31-59). Jesus did not “just love to argue.” Jesus loved the truth! Beloved, truth was not any more popular in Jesus’ day than it is in our day. It was Jesus who told his brethren, “And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.” And, “But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth” (Jn. 8:45,40).

Returned Good For Evil

Jesus taught: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (Matt. 5:44). As we have seen, Jesus practiced what he preached. Jesus restored Malchus’ severed ear – one in the ungodly mob which had come to ruthlessly apprehend and later murder Jesus (Lk. 22:51). While suspended between heaven and earth on the cruel cross, Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Lk. 23:34).

Intelligent reader, please be informed that while Jesus taught and exhibited returning good for evil, he did not advocate nor practice passivity. Allow me to explain. Jesus taught that when one has been personally sinned against, he is to rebuke the trespassing brother (Lk. 17:3,4). However, such action is not retaliatory, but for the reclamation of the erring brother (Lk. 17:3,4).

Good Citizen

Jesus’ conduct relative to civil law was exemplary. It would seem that because Jesus had developed a reputation of being a “rebel” the tax collectors in Capernaum did not expect Jesus to pay tribute (Matt. 17:24-27). However, Jesus did pay his taxes.

Jesus was under the close scrutiny of all. They all with one accord were desperately seeking to find some fault in him (Matt. 12:10,14; 16:1). Jesus had exposed their sins and errors and they desired his destruction (Matt. 21:45,46). Jesus’ hypocritical brethren could not fault him and could not answer his arguments (Matt. 22:46). Hence, envy was evoked on their part (Matt. 27:18). It was this envy coupled with their severe hatred which caused them to crucify the Lord. What is my point? My point is this: if they could have established one infraction either from God’s law as such or from civil law, they would have!

Jesus Was Prayerful

Yes, even the incarnate Son of God depended on prayer. From an examination of Jesus’ life, you find Jesus regularly engaging in prayer to his Father (Jn. 17; Matt. 11:25-27). Jesus customarily prayed before he made important decisions (Lk. 6:12ff).

Jesus did not pray as many of his brethren did. His prayers were not pretentious and formalistic (cf. Matt. 6:5-15). Jesus prayed earnestly, sincerely, and fervently (Lk. 22:44).

Kind reader, when we consider biographies such as Carver’s and Edison’s, we are moved to believe that we similarly can overcome hindrances. We admire these men’s determination and refusal to accept defeat. Moreover, when we consider Jesus’ biography, if you please, we are moved to partake of godliness. Jesus, you see, is our exemplar (1 Pet. 2:21,22). We need to consider him more and marvel at his wonderfulness (Heb. 12:3). Truly, “Never a man spake like him” who “did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth” (Jn. 7:46; 1 Pet. 2:22).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 5, pp. 131-132
March 3, 1988

By Robert F. Turner

The sin of adultery is wide spread; and preaching salvation in Christ necessarily involves telling people guilty of adultery how they can be forgiven. “Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6.9-11). Adultery, like all immorality, is sin against our Holy Creator; yet God loved such sinners, and gave his Son to die in their behalf. They can truly repent, quit their ungodly ways, and have sufficient faith in Christ to be baptized for the remission of their sins (Acts 2:38). God will forgive!

Those who come to God may then go astray, and James calls them “adulterers and adulteresses” (3:4). They have been likened to an espoused bride, presented as a pure virgin to Christ. Do you suppose it is easy on Christ to know his “bride” is unfaithful? Even Paul says, “I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband” (2 Cor. 11:2f). Yet, when spiritual adulteresses repent and pray God for forgiveness this “husband” becomes their Advocate and pleads their case as one who paid the price of sin in their stead (1 Jn. 2:1-2). God forgives, but not without anguish and pain. To truly forgive, the one who has been sinned against must bear the pain rather than demand his pound of flesh from the sinner. That is exactly what God does, in forgiving a sinner “for Christ’s sake.” Think about this! He who is wholly pure will “take back” his espoused who had “gone agadding.”

The prophet Hosea was instructed to cry out against the sins of God’s people, and he neither compromised nor spared priests or laymen in the process. But he was led through a symbolic experience that prepared him to understand God’s feelings (as the one sinned against), and to appreciate the depth of God’s mercy in forgiving Israel. He was told to take a wife from among the ungodly population. She was unfaithful to him, and bore children which were not his own. Her sin was denounced, and she was rejected and punished. But then, God told him to take her again, buying her at a price. Their conjugal relations were not immediately resumed, but eventually restoration was complete. Read the first three chapters of Hosea, and see Homer Hailey’s comments in Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Mercy and forgiveness, even at great cost, are attributes of the Heavenly Father, and of his children.

All this has been written to introduce a touchy problem that is more and more frequently found today among church members. A husband, or wife, becomes unfaithful. Sin will out (Num. 32:23), and an innocent partner is deeply hurt. The guilty party is filled with remorse and regret, truly repents, and seeks to reestablish relationships with his or her family. But the one “sinned against” will not be appeased. The pain is deep, trust has been broken, reconciliation is believed impossible. In my younger days I (foolishly?) accompanied a man to his home where he told his wife of his unfaithfulness and begged her forgiveness. I will never forget the explosion. The home, the children, their future – nothing salved her pride. She had been wronged (he could not deny that), and she would not forgive. I told him to be patient, the shock would wear off, and she would reconsider; but there was no change. I found myself in the difficult position of trying to persuade the “innocent” party to forgive the penitent guilty party.

I do not believe the Lord’s “except for fornication” was a new regulation, but was the starting of an exception implied in the “leave, cleave, and one flesh” God intended from the beginning (Matt. 19:4-9). Adultery violates the basic oneness of marriage. The “sanctified” nature of the union (that the children may be “holy,” 1 Cor. 5:14) is profaned by adultery. I believe the innocent party has the right to “put away”; and any who would take this article as an endorsement or compromise with immorality has seriously misread the material. However, Christ’s teaching does not obligate this putting away. On the contrary, taking the hurt and truly forgiving the offender brings us close to the very heart of Christian ethics. The home is a “greater cause” than one’s personal pride; and concern for one’s partner and the home should have precedence over personal. feelings. We have no desire to shift blame, but sometimes the reaction of the “innocent” gives a subtle hint of hidden conflicts which may have contributed to the infidelity in the first place.

Consider Jesus’ treatment of the woman taken in adultery (John 8:3-11). The woman’s guilt was not questioned, and her sin remained regardless of the use to which the hypocritical scribes and Pharisees put it. Jesus disposed of his tempters by saying, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” None are sin free in the absolute sense, but Jesus apparently referred to sins of intent or like nature to the woman’s sin. One by one her tormentors walked away, the K.J. says, “convicted by their own conscience.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more.” True, Jesus could accurately read the woman’s heart and know her penitence. But all forgiveness on our part must be on a basis of imperfect knowledge, yet we are repeatedly told to forgive (Matt. 6:15; 18:21-35). “The quality of mercy” is a God-like quality which he expects his children to cultivate.

It is very possible that genuine forgiveness of a wrong can weld a marriage into a closer and more understanding relationship. No, the sin is not helpful. It is heart rending, disruptive, breaking trusts that may take much time and faithfulness to restore. But true repentance followed by forgiveness means two hearts have been deeply touched. Both have suffered, and now gratitude and mercy can mature their respective subjects. The forgiven sinner should not dwell morbidly on the past, but remain regretfully aware of sin that required extra-ordinary love to be forgiven. And the forgiver has given up self in a way that enriches and refines one’s life.

When one learns his or her partner has been unfaithful, the flood of anger, shame, even self reproach is understandable. Some may feel this is the end of their world – and it has been severely shattered. But it need not be the end. Take time to wear off the first feelings. Reassess your options slowly, deliberately, prayerfully. Remember the Heavenly Father’s sacrifice of his Son that you might be forgiven your sins. Then, consider forgiving your mate. Perhaps you can repeat the Savior’s words, “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.”

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 5, pp. 135, 151
March 3, 1988

By Garreth L. Clair

The Church was in the purpose of God as early as the birth of Saul of Tarsus (i.e. Paul the apostle to the Gentiles). In connection with this fact please observe the statement by the great apostle in Galatians 1: 15,16, “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace. . . . To reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood. ” From the reading it is obvious that God separated Paul from the time of his birth for the purpose of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles.

Since Paul was separated in the mind of God for the work of proclaiming the gospel message to the Gentiles from the time of his birth, we may safely deduce from this fact that the church was in the purpose of God as far back as before the birth of Paul.

Even further back in history God purposed the church for the church was in the purpose of God at the time of Moses. In Acts 26:22,23 we read, “Therefore having obtained help from. God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come – “that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to arise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.” From this reading we learn that the prophets, including Moses, foretold the suffering of Christ on the cross. The apostle tells us that Christ purchased the Church with his own blood shed on the cross (Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25). Therefore, it is unthinkable that God knew his Son would suffer on the cross, but did not know and plan that through this action the church would come into existence. Therefore, God knew and had purposed at the time of Moses and the prophets the establishment of the church as a direct result of the shed blood of Christ on the cross.

Even further back in time, at the time of Abraham, God had purposed the church. Paul tells us that there was revealed to him a mystery, “That the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body and partakers of his promise in Christ by the Gospel” (Eph. 3:6). The promise mentioned here is the same promise made to Abraham (Gen. 12:3; 22:18). This is the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham that all nations were to be blessed in his seed (Acts 3:25,26; Gal.3:26-29).

When God told Abraham that all nations were to be blessed in his seed (Christ – Gal. 3:16), he meant that the Gentiles were to be fellow-heirs with the Jews of all the benefits of membership in the one church (Eph. 1:22,23; Col. 1:18; Eph. 3:6,7). God could not plan for the Gentiles to be fellow-members of the body, which is the church, without planning the existence of the church.

And even further back than Abraham, the church was in the purpose of God before the foundation of the world. The expression, “foundation of the world,” has been understood by some to mean the beginning of the Christian dispensation. Because of this concept by some we present the following facts:

(1) Paul’s use of the expression in Ephesians 1:4 seems to be parallel with the expression “eternal purpose” in Ephesians 3:11.

(2) Peter speaks of Christ being foreknown before the foundations of the world, but manifest in these last times for you (1 Pet. 1:20).

a. The manifestation of Christ refers to his coming in the flesh – a period pre-dating Christianity. b. Peter speaks of the “foundation of the world” as a time prior to “these last times.” Consequently, the foundation of the world in this instance was more than the beginning of the Christian dispensation.

That being true, we can truthfully say that the church was in the mind of God since before the creation of the world. Please notice Ephesians 3:10, 11: “To the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord. ” God therefore chose us “in Him” (Christ) before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love (Eph. 1:4).

In Ephesians 5:25-27 we are taught that the church for which Jesus died is to be holy and without blemish, the 6osen of Ephesians 1:4 involves the church of Ephesians 5:27. In view of that fact the church was in the purpose of God before the foundation of the earth. The apostle Peter further says we are redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ, “who verity was foreordained before the foundation of the world” (Emp. mine, G.C.; 1 Pet. 1:18-20). Is it possible that God would have foreordained that Jesus would suffer as a lamb in sacrifice for the redemption of man’s sin and yet did not know that the redeemed would constitute the church?

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 5, p. 138
March 3, 1988