Truth Magazine

By Larry D. Siegle

It was a common practice during the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry for those who were stricken with the loathsome disease of leprosy, to stand off at a distance crying, “unclean, unclean,” lest they contaminate someone else with their dreaded malady (Luke 17:11-14; Lev. 13:46ff). In the past several weeks, I have developed a greater understanding of what some of those people must have felt like. The difference in my case, is that many of my former brethren have come to the conclusion that I have some form of “spiritual leprosy,”which must be avoided at all costs!

As one who considers himself to be an honest student of God’s Word, I have never been afraid to investigate any biblical subject, even though it might mean that I have to change my viewpoint. Those Jews who were listening to Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost came to a point in time when they realized that a change was in order (Acts 2:37ff). For quite some time, I had become free in using such terms as “liberal” and “anti,” without really considering how those terms actually apply. Thus, I began an honest quest to discover where such labels come from, and for what purpose they are used.

With the help of some conservative brethren living in and around the Kansas City area, I spent about six months looking at the “institutional question,” and why those who stood opposed to such things were branded as “antis.” I was given an opportunity to read material written by learned men on both sides of the “issues.” I read brother Thomas B. Warren’s book dealing with congregational cooperation and found many of his arguments to be weak at best. I was also afforded the opportunity to read portions of debates, such as the Cogdill-Woods discussion, which took place even before I was born. The only honest conclusion that I could come to was that those who support “institutionalism,” do so apart from the authority of God’s Word.

At the suggestion of several of the brethren who preach in conservative congregations, I began to teach some of members of the “liberal” congregation I preached for the truth concerning these things. However, the general attitude displayed by the majority of those I approached was that of “pooh-poohing” the whole thing, not even willing to consider the matter seriously. The point in time came when I could no longer, in good conscience, participate in their 46social gospel” philosophy. To eat at their fellowship meals seemed somewhat like partaking of meats which had been sacrificed to idols (1 Cor. 8). 1 also found that I could no longer feel the freedom to contribute to the church treasury, because of their involvement in the so-called “sponsoring church” arrangement, a clear and blatant violation of the biblical autonomy of a local congregation.

It was on a Wednesday evening that I decided to call the men of the congregation together for a meeting to discuss the conclusions I had come to in my personal study. It was at this point in time that the dreaded disease of “spiritual leprosy” began to appear.

In the beginning of the meeting, the men seemed to listen attentively to the biblical evidence surrounding the subject of scriptural cooperation between congregations. Most of them followed along in their Bibles as we discussed the sufficiency of the church of Christ to fulfill its mission in a local sense, without the seeming benefit of human plans and devices. However, the biblical evidence was not destined to prevail. I soon found myself under a barrage, being flooded with a multitude of hypothetical situations and “what if’s.” This line of ,argumentation continued for over an hour, at which point it was decided by the men that I should not be allowed to preach on Sunday morning. A vote was taken, and I was being quarantined, lest someone else become a victim of this spiritual leprosy! It was also decided that we should meet again on Saturday evening to discuss the matter further.

Over the next few days, there were many phone calls, some encouraging me for the position I had taken regarding these issues, others were not quite as thrilled, wondering why I wanted to be an “anti.” One of the men in the congregation was quick to remind me that I have a wife and three children to support, and that such a stand could prove fatal to “my career.” If it had not been for the prayers of faithful Christians throughout the Kansas City area, I am not sure the pressure would not have overcome me.

Saturday evening soon came, and fourteen men were in attendance at this meeting. One of the “leading” men stood up to take charge of the gathering by informing all of those present, that the meeting was going to be conducted in a “scriptural fashion.” It was his contention that I should not be allowed any opportunity to speak, and that to do so would be as bad as allowing a person from the Christian Church to come and teach. The men, however, still wanted to know more about the subject before deciding my fate. We discussed the “issues” for over an hour, with very little progress being made. Once again, the men were filled to overflowing with “what if” questions.

I summed up the biblical contention that Bible authority is established in three ways: (1) by direct statement, (2) by approved example, and (3) by necessary inference, and that for something to be an “expedient” (the institutional catchall), it must first be “lawful.” I also affirmed that the local church is sufficient to fulfill its own mission, without the outside influence and interference of another congregation. It did not take very long for them to make a decision on my future work there. Within fifteen minutes the verdict was in, and I was guilty of being “anti.” The result was that I was released from my duties with that congregation.

Since that time, I have begun working with a “sound” congregation in the city of Topeka, Kansas. In fact, it is the only conservative congregation in the area. We do not yet have the amount of support we need. The congregation is small in number, and are unable to support us fully. Any help you can give us will be greatly appreciated. Most of all, we ask that you continue to pray for us as we seek to do God’s will.

Much has happened to us in the last month, and I am committed to the fact that if being faithful to God makes me a “spiritual leper,” then so let it be!

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 5, pp. 129, 151
March 3, 1988

By Dennis C. Abernathy

“Because strait is the gate and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matt. 7:14).Most brethren claim to be seeking the “strait and narrow” gate that leads to eternal life. But isn’t it strange that many of the same are unable to find the door of the church building on Sunday and Wednesday evening?

These same brethren say they love the Lord. But it appears that their love for him is limited to the Sunday morning worship hour only! (And some do not even attend that regularly.)

The prevailing idea seems to be that one can manage to find the church building on Sunday morning (that is, if something more important does not come up). They may then act as though Sunday and Wednesday evening services do not exist. But, these same people want to be considered and treated as though they were sincerely seeking the kingdom first (Matt. 6:33), and walking the “strait and narrow way.

“If the “strait and, narrow” way could be found in front of the television, on the lake or golf course, or at the campsite; if it could be found resting in bed, at the family reunion, the little league game, scout meeting, or at various social and community club meetings, I would not worry so much about some of my brethren, for I am sure they would find and seek it out!

Brethren and friends, let’s face the truth of the matter. If you cannot find the doorway to the place of worship regularly, where Christ is present with those who are his and those who attend to the work in his kingdom, then don’t expect to find the “strait and narrow” way which leads to heaven! You just may be disappointed.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 4, p. 117
February 18, 1988

By Ron Halbrook

My wife and I recently discussed Sewell Hall’s article “Deal Gently With the Young Man” (Christianity Magazine, October 1987, p. 293). The Halls have been dear friends of ours for a number of years and we appreciate the tender appeal of this article for consideration to be given toward our children who may err. Donna and I have talked at times about the possible prospect of facing a time when one or more of our children might not be faithful to the Lord, a sadness that invades the homes of preachers as well as other Christians. We appreciate the good job the Halls have done raising their children and especially the fact that their son Gardner has been faithfully laboring in the gospel. May God raise up many more such faithful laborers from such godly homes! If and when such young men stray, may God help us all to show the love and patience that restores such an one with meekness (Gal. 6:1). I am thankful to have known faithful preachers of the gospel who have followed that very course of action, as we are always admonished to do in 2 Timothy 2:24-26.

As brother Hall observed, “Some young men who start on a course of error cannot be saved regardless of approach. . . . ” As Donna and I discussed the possibility of such an apostasy in our own family, we conclude that an additional plea is needed with the one made by brother Hall, and we believe he will agree with us in making this plea to our brethren. Our plea is: Uphold the truth, no matter what our son does.

David mourned for his son Absalom who died in apostasy, as any godly parent would have done. Absalom had been guilty of treachery against his own father and had betrayed the love of his family, not to mention the love of God. David cried, “O my son Absalom! My son, my son Absalom! Would God I had died for thee, 0 Absalom, my son, my son” (2 Sam. 18:33).

A father cannot forget that he is a father; and the more holy and generous his nature, the more powerfully will the fatherly feeling assert itself. As seen in our Savior’s case, when he wept over Jerusalem already doomed because of sin against him, equal to, yea, worse even than, that of Absalom, the natural feelings of the heart may flow forth in most touching strains, while there is in the soul a most perfect accord with the righteous judgment of God. . . . There is no complaint against the wisdom or justice of God, no trace of a spirit of discontent with the administration of divine love; it was pure sorrow for a ruined life. David’s humanity was not lost in his kingly office. The love of a father’s heart is not eradicated by a son’s ingratitude. The parable of the prodigal son is evidence of this and also of its divine counterpart. And in the case of David, the remembrance of his own sad fall having possibly exercised a detrimental influence over Absalom, just in the most critical period of his life, could not but render both just and natural this great lamentation (Pulpit Commentary: 2 Samuel, p. 449).

In spite of David’s sorrow and in spite of his love for Absalom, he never wavered in his lovefor the Lord and for the truth. We as parents need that vital lesson today.

If the plea of parents and others does not bring my child to godly sorrow and repentance, if he is going into apostasy and sowing the seeds of digression in the hearts of others, what should be the reaction of those who are my friends and brethren? There is the danger of their failing to expose error and to uphold the truth as they should because our friendship blinds them to the reality of the dangers unfolding. There may be the conscious or unconscious fear of offending the young man or his parents when it involves the children of our own dear friends. We need to be reminded at such times of Matthew 10:34-39, where Christ said,

Think not that I came to send peace of the earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law: and a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that doth not take his cross and follow after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it; and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

My own love and loyalty toward Christ would be tested if Sewell’s son went into apostasy, because of my deep love and respect for the Hall family and their children. I have friends who love me and my family so much that it would test those friends’ love of the Lord and truth if my children went into apostasy.

For the sake of my friends and even my children who will read this, should such a time of apostasy and testing come to our family (God forbid!), please “deal gently with the young man.” But, then, what if he does not repent and correct his course? If he dodges the truth, covers his apostasy with double talk, works undercover to lead others away from the truth, casts aspersions on those who question his teaching, and seeks sympathy for error by playing the martyr, please do not aid and abet his sin by defending him and criticizing those who suffer the agony of exposing the apostasy. Please do not do so because it will harden my son in error and apostasy, it will result in the precious sons of other brethren being led away from the truth, it will damage the cause and church of our Lord by fostering an atmosphere of softness and compromise, and it will manifest the sin of thinking of men “above that which is written” (1 Cor. 4:6). Such a course may be mistaken for love, mercy, peace, and unity, but it is not upright “according to the truth of the gospel” (Gal. 2:14).

If necessary, face my son in the public arena and withstand him. “Let God be true, but every man a liar” (Rom. 3:4). “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet” (Isa. 58:1). There will be pain and tears in your heart, and some who ought to help and encourage you will charge you with meanness and with “driving” my son deeper into error – I speak from experience. Do not cease or desist in the face of these charges. Please love the Lord above my son! Recall the incident of Peter’s compromise in Galatians 2. Had you been Peter’s father, whom would you have appreciated: Barnabas, who also was carried away and loathed to challenge his dear brother, or Paul, who withstood Peter to the face? Who contributed to Peter’s error: Barnabas or Paul? Who understood true love both for Christ and Peter: Barnabas or Paul? Who followed the course which turned Peter from the error of his way and so saved a soul from death: Barnabas or Paul?

Dear brother and friend, if you find my son in Peter’s place, please, please be a true friend to Christ, to the truth, to the church, to my son, to other sons, and to my wife and myself – be a Paul and not a Barnabas! I will thank you and love you through all eternity for your efforts, whether it produces the desired result or not. Do not imagine that you can be wiser or more gentle than God who directed the beloved apostle Paul. Warn and plead with our son in the words of John, the apostle of love:

Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not his teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting: for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works (2 Jn. 9-11).

May God help us all to use wisdom and love as we seek to save the erring and to protect the church from apostasy. “Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:2).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 4, pp. 113-114
February 18, 1988

By Sewell Hall

David’s instruction to Joab (2 Samuel 18:5) to deal gently with an opposing military leader seems strange. This was not the way he dealt with Goliath; or with the cities of the Geshurites, the Girzites and the Amalekites (1 Samuel 27:8-9); or with the kings and generals of the Philistines, the Moabites, the Ammonites and the Syrians (2 Samuel 8-10). Indeed, Christians sometime find difficulty explaining some of the imprecatory Psalms of David, such as Psalm 109 in which he prays concerning an enemy that his days may be few, his wife a widow, his children fatherless beggars, and his property seized by creditors with none to extend mercy.

Why, then, the appeal for gentleness? The answer lies in the identity of the enemy. The young man was Absalom, David’s son. And when word came that Absalom had been slain, “the king was much moved, and went up to the chamber over the gate, and wept: and as he went, thus he said, 0 my son Absalom! my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, 0 Absalom, my son, my son” (2 Samuel 18:33).

What a difference it makes when a young man is “my son!” I can understand David’s appeal for gentleness. I have a son -one of the rich blessings of God. As he encounters “perils of the city” preaching the gospel to the Spanish-speaking people of New York, I often am reminded of Solomon’s words: “A wise son maketh a glad father” (Proverbs 10:1).

Suppose that on one of those all-too-rare occasions when I hear him preach in English, I hear some teaching which I consider to be error. What would you expect of me? Can you believe that I would go to other preachers reporting his error before I spoke to him? Would you expect me to accuse him of accepting all of the false doctrines that may have been associated with his erroneous position in the past, or all of the logical consequences that I might draw from what he has said? Would I immediately conclude that “he is one of them rather than one of us, ” challenge him to a public debate or rush into print to warn the brotherhood? You would question my love for him if I did so.

Love, of course, would demand that I discuss with my son any apparent error in his teaching. I would be concerned, however, about how I approached him. I would first determine if he actually believed what he said; if not, that would end the matter. But if so, I might then point out some of the consequences of his teaching and suggest that he restudy the matter, considering any additional Scriptures I might offer. I would not press him for an immediate defense so as to avoid having him commit himself too quickly to his teaching; I would rather propose that we both study it further and discuss it at a later time.

If Paul wrote to a young preacher suggesting that he “rebuke not an older man, but exhort him as a father” (1 Timothy 5:1), is it not in order that older preachers should deal with all younger preachers and younger Christians as they would with their own sons? Some young men who start on a course of error cannot be saved regardless of approach, but it is possible for us to be so eager to “save the brotherhood” that we sacrifice some young men who could be rescued by the kind of gentle dealing practiced by Aquila and Priscilla who, hearing Apollos teach error, “took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately” (Acts 18:26).

Remember young John Mark. Paul may have been right in believing that the journey which he and Barnabas planned would be jeopardized by a young man who had shown some instability in the past (Acts 15:36-41). But that young man needed a friend and aren’t we glad that Barnabas was there to deal gently with him? Otherwise, we might not have that useful little book that bears his name and reveals so much about Jesus.

The fact is that gentleness is appropriate in dealing with anyone who is in error, whether young or old. “A servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:24-26).

Let me make an appeal for all young preachers, but especially for one who goes by the name of Gardner Hall. If some godly “soldier of the cross” hears him preach something that is erroneous, I have two requests. First, take him aside and explain to him the way of God more accurately. Second, please “deal gently for my sake with the young man” – he is my son. (Reprinted from Christianity Magazine [Oct. 19871, p. 293).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 4, p. 112
February 18, 1988