Truth Magazine

By Bryan Vinson, Sr.

“Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and he is the savior of the body. Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word; that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh but nourisheth and cherished it, even as the Lord the church. For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning CHRIST AND THE CHURCH. Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular so love his wife as himself, and the wife see that she reverence her husband” (Eph. 5:22-33).

Countless sermons have been preached and articles written on the subject above stated, and the language here cited from Paul’s letter to the Ephesian church has served as the basis for such lessons. The timeliness of such teaching has always been present, and is now as urgent as anytime heretofore. There is no relationship that has ever been established between people as close, as sacred and as blessed as that between husband and wife. It is the basis of human society, and its formation and functioning constitutes the legitimate source for the propagation of the species. Any corruption, perversion or renunciation of the proper and lawful existence and safeguarding of this Divinely established institution cannot but result disastrously for those so doing, and, to what ever extent such prevails, be subversive of society in general.

The apostle, in the above language, acknowledges the exceptional intimacy of the marital state and affirms the relation of Christ and His church, as illustrated there” by, to be a “great mystery,” that is, the relation of Christ and His church is such as to be not discoverable by man apart from being revealed by God. Hence, whatever we may learn about either Christ or the church, or the relationship as obtaining between the two, is to be ascertained by the study of the scriptures. The emphasis here to be noted is the love of Christ for the church in giving himself for it, and what he purposes in respect thereto, and the authority that he rightfully exercises over it. All of these enter into and create the closeness and justifies the intimacy as is to always exist.

The sublime teaching thus incorporated in this passage forbids, for those who have received it, any severance or divorcement of Christ and his church at any time and in any respect. On the principle of thought of “the association of ideas” in activating the human memory, the mere mention of Christ brings to mind the church, and, conversely, any thought regarding the church immediately projects to the forefront the Christ in all His regal splendor and matchless majesty. For anyone to endeavor the evaluation of either apart from the other is to reach false conclusions. That many have so done is indisputable; and that what some have done others may do is obvious by reason of the universality of human fallibility. Truth resting on evidence for its support is more difficult to ascertain and thus secure than error, because the latter is so readily accessible and requires no effort to embrace it. Its arsenal is founded on ignorance and filled with the implements of pride, passion and prejudice, manufactured in the forges of selfishness and worldly interests. Truth, redeeming truth, is the content of Divine Revelation, and enjoined upon all is the obligation to search, study and meditate on its sublime utterances as therein embodied. Thus is explainable the prevalence of mistaken ideas regarding Christ and the church.

It is apologetically expressed quite commonly that the church is of no vital worth in the salvation of man; that we need to be converted to Christ, and that this does not essentially include any conviction respecting the importance of the church; that one may become a Christian without being a member of the church, and hence membership in the church is optional on the part of the Christian, and consequently incidental rather than essential in its character. Therefore, rests the assumption of the freedom of choice as to what church one may become identified with, for, if being a member of the church is optional and non-essential, it necessarily follows that it is immaterial as to which church, out of the many existing, that one belong to. The statement that Christ is the Savior of the body, and the head of the church, in this passage, together with the clearly established truth that the church is the body and the body is the church (Eph. 1:22; Col. 1:18) confirms forever the fact that membership in the church is vital to being identified as one of the saved of the Lord, for such he adds to the church (Acts 2:47). Hence, for anyone to identify any church as being unrelated to and non-essential in the salvation of man, is equal to acknowledging that the church of which he speaks is not the church of which Paul spoke, the church of the Lord.

A respect for these truths requires one to defend the church against its detractors both without and within its holy precincts. We cannot but expect such from those without; but it is heart-rending to witness the injuries wrought against the church from those within. That such is knowingly and intentionally done is not charged, but that it, nonetheless, is being done is evident to those who know what the scriptures reveal as touching the church and intelligently appraises the developments that are current. The tragedy is intensified when it is realized those so doing are animated by a zeal to save the lost. This is laudable, and its absence in the purposes and efforts of any reflects a state of spiritual impoverishment. But to allow one’s self to be carried away from a becoming regard for the teaching of the Word of God by an unrestrained zeal is neither wise nor safe.

We have received word from different sources regarding a brother-team of evangelists who aspire to evangelize America within the next decade. They have secured a large tent, and are conducting meetings of several weeks duration in different cities. As reported, they are following the policy of keeping the church in the background in an effort to by-pass the prejudices of the popular mind. I wonder how they can faithfully preach the gospel without preaching the “things concerning the kingdom of God?”

The apostles did not, neither could they as guided by the Holy Spirit (Acts 1: 3; 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; and, 28:31). To reason that such a policy is prudent is to reflect, therefore, against the Holy Spirit, and the Christ who sent him. The apostles always drove straight to the affirmation respecting the resurrection of Jesus, and this was a most distasteful and repugnant doctrine to many of those to whom they spoke. The Samaritans were baptized when they believed Phillip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Christ, whereas these brethren, apparently design to baptize folks who believe what they preach apart from any preaching on the kingdom of God. Inspiration joined the kingdom of God with the name of Christ, and identifies both as properly incorporated in preaching Christ! Shall we deviate therefrom? I devoutly pray that we shall not, and that this is either a misleading report, or, being true, that they shall alter their course.

The relation as established between Christ and the church is such that to disparage either is equal to discrediting the other; no man can esteem Christ above the degree of esteem he holds for the church of Christ as He established, ordered and directed its character and functioning in the performance of its mission here on earth. He is the head of the church, and “as the church is subject to Christ, so, let the wives be to their husbands in everything.” This teaches that the church is subject to Christ in everything. And as the church is the “fullness of him that filleth all in all,” we cannot be true to Christ in any particular wherein we fail to be true to the church. Just as the Bible “as God gave it is adapted to man as God made him,” even so is the church adapted as Christ made it to accomplish the ends for which he made it. Let it be held forth in all its pristine purity and apostolic sufficiency as the divine instrumentality to manifest to all intelligent creatures the manifold wisdom of God.

The Word of God is the seed of the kingdom, and the seed cannot be sown without the kingdom becoming known. Furthermore, the word of God being the seed of the kingdom, the preaching of the word, and it only, never can produce or result in the establishment of anything else or other than the church. This will never produce any human institution, religious, educational, eleemosynary or otherwise as its legitimate progeny. Certainly, human institutions independent of any religious connection or character may be legitimately established as worthy instruments of human wisdom for human needs and purposes, but such is not the direct offspring of the gospel of Christ, the word of truth. The relation of the gospel of Christ, the power of God unto salvation, to the church, or kingdom of Christ, which is the body of the saved, is direct, immediate and indissoluble. The sufficiency of the one is a guarantee of the sufficiency of the other.

Any attitude of a lack of appreciation of the church is but an identical lack of respect and reverence for the Christ, and constitutes a repudiation of equal degree of his word. Every alteration of the church is our attitude, attachment and action is but a rejection to that extent of Christ as head of the church and the Savior of the body. Herein is perceived the real gravity of the offences being perpetrated against the church today by many who are members of it. It is basically a shift from the wisdom of God that is to be beheld in the church to the wisdom of man; it is the cultivating of a spirit of glorying in the flesh rather than glorying in the Lord, unto whom is to be glory in the church throughout all ages world without end.

The church is the Divine Creation for the accomplishing of His Will on earth7 and we are creating our own organs of operation as substitutes therefore, and in so doing we are modifying the character of the church from that of the creature to that of the creator in elation to the accomplishing of the divine purpose among men. A man was struck dead for putting unauthorized hands on the Ark of the Covenant, and the lesson preserved for us is that we should not lay unauthorized hands on the divine creation to alter or modify its form or function.

The developments in process among us today will inevitably, if persisted in, so alter the divine economy as touching the church to ultimately destroy its divine identity. The processes of apostasy, which were beginning before the days of the apostles ended, resulted in such a corruption of the church as issued into something other than the church. The digression of the past century led those victimized thereby entirely beyond the point of being the people of God, and thus constituted another religious body than his. May many yet awaken to the wisdom and safety of “letting the church be the church,” and those who are Christians being such and nothing more, Christians and nothing less.

Truth Magazine, VI: 3, pp. 13-15
December 1961

By Daniel G. Brown, PH. D.

Why Are Fathers So Necessary?

Let us consider now a few reasons why fathers are so necessary, particularly from the standpoint of child development and child psychology. In the first place, the character that a child develops is often a direct reflection of the values of the parents. A child comes to think and feel and act in terms of right or wrong, and good or bad, largely based on how the parents think and feel and act about what is right or wrong and good or bad. If, for example, there is little or no emotional attachment between father and child, then that child simply does not have the opportunity to get the guidance, values, and sense of direction in life from the father. And one possible consequence of this in the case of sons, for example, is boys who grow up to have consciences that are deficient and characters that are defective, boys who become chronic delinquents or antisocial personalities, etc. Cal Farley, founder of Boy’s Ranch, has observed that 90% of the youngsters who come to Boy’s Ranch are the products of homes where there was little or no father influence. Similarly, Father Flanagan reports that in the background of almost every boy offender is a story of shocking neglect and that between 80 and 90% of the boys at Boy’s Town who get into trouble, come from homes broken by divorce, separation or death, or from homes in which the boy’s chance for normal adjustment is reduced to a minimum by the clash of personalities in parental preoccupation with interests outside of the home. And in this same connection, Healy and Bronner, in a study of 143 male delinquents, found that only one in five expressed any love for father. Finally, Judge Leibowitz, of Brooklyn’s highest criminal- court, has concluded that the number one factor in the background of delinquents was an insufficiency or inadequacy of; father. There is thus striking agreement among all of these authorities, even though they come from different professions and institutions: namely, the lack of psychological fatherhood in the development of delinquency.

In addition to the development of delinquency and anti-social patterns, there is another problem of considerable magnitude, although it is seldom discussed outside of Psychiatric-psychological channels. This problem concerns sexual deviations, particularly male homosexuality, transvestism and sex-role inversion. There is now a rather convincing array of evidence suggesting that boys who do not have a male figure at least some of the time in early childhood with which to identify are susceptible to sex-role disturbances and are more prone to develop sexually deviant behavior in adulthood. This likelihood is increased in boys who are emotionally smothered by their mothers and emotionally starved by their fathers. There no longer seems to be any doubt that considerable risk is involved when the father is physically absent or psychologically distant from the son during the critical period from infancy to the third or fourth year. Passive, feminine male homosexuals typically have childhoods in which there was an abnormally close mother-son relationship, where the mother and son were over attached, physically and emotionally, to each other, while the father-son relationship was one of indifference, non-existence, or rejection, and there was no adequate male substitute.

Thus, not only does the son’s character development, in part, depend on an adequate father or male figure relationship, but, in addition, that son’s very masculine development and chances for a normal sexual life would appear to depend, in part, on adequate fathering in childhood.

But it is not simply to avoid having a son grow up to be a misfit, or a deviant, or a delinquent, or a criminal that fathers are needed. There are positive aspects to this business of being a father, benefits and rewarding experiences for both father and child. In the case of a daughter, the father is often the first “boyfriend” in the little girl’s life. Her first “romance” usually occurs at the age of three or four or five with her father. And what kind of man her father turns out to be in her life will exert a very formative and lasting influence on her attitudes and feelings toward other members of the male sex. In this connection, a recent issue of Newsweek magazine contained an article on Caroline Kennedy who, it was pointed out, enjoys a warm and close relationship with her father. “The first things she does when she jumps out of her miniature four-poster bed in the morning is to scamper to his room, pop her dark blond head in the door, and call: ‘Hi Daddy.’ Sometimes when the President is working at his desk he will look out the window and spy Caroline romping on the south lawn. If there are no important visitors on hand, he will walk out into the rose garden and clap his hands. It’s a secret signal of their own and Caroline always comes running.” Caroline is fortunate indeed to have a father who, though the busiest man in the world, finds time to be a father.

In the case of a son, the father is or should be his most important model, an example after which to pattern his own behavior. For a boy to have a warm, close, genuinely affectionate, mutually respectable relationship with his father probably contributes as much as any other single factor to that boy’s psychological development and emotional maturity.

It might be noted, in passing, that fathers may also exert far reaching influences in the cultivation of abilities and talents in their children. Take, for example, some of the greatest names in music: Mozart, Beethoven, Liszt, Bach, Brahms, etc . . . all from early childhood taught music by their fathers. And many other notable examples could also be mentioned, James and John Stuart Mill, Henry and William James, etc.

What is it that a father can provide that is so important in the life of a little child? Many fathers seem to think that the answer to this question is a “good home,” i.e., good food, a good house, good clothes, etc. But these things have little to do with the emotional needs of the child. One of the best answers to this question is from a book by English and Foster, quoted as follows:

Actually the things that a baby needs most cost very little in terms of dollars and cents. He has never heard of the Joneses. He is unconcerned about whether you have a million dollars or just enough to pay for his arrival. He does not care whether you have a new car or none at all. He can be as happy in a one-room apartment as in a ten-room house surrounded with landscaped gardening. What he wants is love, warmth, and acceptance for himself . . . strong arms to hold him and make him feel safe, smiles and cheerfulness, serenity and a sense of order, someone to come to him when he cries out of his sense of newness and strangeness. He wants you not to be too busy to play with him or too serious to en joy him. He wants you to stir his awakening mind to a joy and interest in the world around him . . . He wants and needs emotional security.

These, then, are some of the things that a child needs from a father. It is in helping supply some of these compelling needs and wants that fathers are so necessary and, not only necessary, but obligated to supply them. Just as a highway sign in Kansas reads, “You are morally responsible for safe driving,” “Fathers are morally responsible for adequate fathering.”

When men fail to supply these fundamental needs of their children, i.e., when men fail as fathers, whatever success they may be in other respects, including eminence in their profession, they have failed in life’s most serious and sacred trust. During the last four or five years, the writer has had occasion to counsel with disturbed military families and there have been a number of instances where the father was basically a failure as far as his children were concerned. Two actual cases may be mentioned briefly: An adolescent boy, son of a highly successful military officer, was referred for psychiatric evaluation because of social maladjustment and juvenile offenses. This boy was unable to recall a single instance, not one, in his entire life when his father expressed any warmth and love to him. This was confirmed by the mother who stated, “My husband never really cared for our son, he seemed to resent him from the beginning, and he was never close or affectionate to him; he did, however, punish him frequently and often severely for any infraction or mistake.” The other case was that of an officer with high level responsibility, with an outstanding military record, who developed emotional difficulties himself and had to be referred to another base for psychiatric evaluation. This man was such a failure as a father that all of his several children expressed their hope to their mother that she would not bring “him” (meaning their father) back home from the hospital when she returned!

 

Conclusions

 

In conclusion, there are two books and a parable that might be recommended to fathers everywhere. The books are: Fathers Are Parents, Too, By English and Foster (Putnam’s, New York, 1951), and Understanding Your Boy by Flanagan (Rinehart, New York, 1950). Any father who would like to make a conscientious effort to develop further his adequacy as a father will find these books very helpful and full of sound, practical father-child psychology. The parable is that of the Prodigal Son as recorded in the Book of St. Luke. Dr. Charles Curran, Professor of Psychology at Loyola University, has referred to this parable as one of the most perfect stories ever written. It is mentioned and recommended here simply because it contains an account of fatherhood at its psychological best.

What kind of life pattern should fathers provide their children? In trying to answer this question, it is especially important for fathers to remember above all that, Children Learn What They Live. How a child lives and what a child experiences is greatly influenced and in part even determined by how his father lives, his father’s values, his father’s character:

Children Learn What They Live

If a child lives with criticism, he learns to condemn.
If a child lives with hostility, he learns to fight.
If a child lives with fear, he learns to be apprehensive.
If a child lives with pity, he learns to be sorry for himself.
If a child lives with jealousy, he learns to feel guilty.
If a child lives with tolerance, he learns to be patient.
If a child lives with acceptance, he learns to love.
If a child lives with approval, he learns to like himself.
If a child lives with recognition, he learns to have a goal.
If a child lives with fairness, he learns what Justice is.
If a child lives with honesty, he le4rns what truth is.
If a child lives with security, he learns to have faith in himself.

If a child lives with friendliness, he learns that the world is a nice place in which to live.*Indeed, children do learn what they live, and fathers, for better or worse, have much to do with the final outcome.

(*Quoted from Hyde Park News, Hyde Park School for the Deaf, Los Angeles, California).

Truth Magazine VI: 2, pp. 11-13
November 1961

By Glenn L. Shaver

Jesus Christ prayed for his followers to be ONE (John 17:2-22). The apostle Paul wrote to the church at Corinth reproving them for their divisions and exhorted all to be of the same mind and judgment, speaking the same things (I Cor. 1:10-13). He also wrote to the Ephesians exhorting them to “keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3). Thus, it is Christ’s will for his people to be united and not divided.

Yet, there is division among Christ’s followers today, just as there was in the 1st century. Some of the problems causing differences in the 1st century were: circumcision, keeping of the Law of Moses, heathen feasts, worshiping of angels, etc. Some of the current problems are: “Missionary Societies” and “Sponsoring Church Cooperation” in preaching the gospel; “Educational Institutions” taking funds from the churches to edify; “Benevolent Organizations” to do the work of relieving the needy for the churches; “Socialized Gospel Movement” in building “recreation and fellowship halls,” “youth camps,” etc. to entertain and provide recreation for the young people, etc.

These “human organizations” set up to do the work for the churches are causing division among the followers of Christ. The promoters of such “human institutions” are guilty of “driving the wedge that split the log.” Remember, “these six things cloth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:” (What is the seventh thing?) “He that soweth discord among brethren” (Prov. 6: 16-19).

When faithful and sincere brethren ask for the scriptural authority (precept, approved example, or necessary deduction or inference) for the above practices, the promoters of such practices cry, “You are trying to kill the good works we are doing.” No, no, beloved, we are not trying to kill any good work, but we are asking that the good works be ordained of God and that the churches work in the manner God has appointed.

Truth Magazine VI: 3, p. 1a
December 1961

By Richard Weaver

The Church Is a Kingdom

The division and resulting confusion of the religious world today will continue until the leaders of the sects recognize that the church of the Lord is not a democracy whose practices are to be determined by majority vote or by conferences and councils of men. Jesus in the Word has taught us that the church is a kingdom. Read Matthew chapter 13 that records parables of the kingdom which refer to the church and Matt. 16:18 where He spoke of building his church, then in the very next verse referred to it as the kingdom. See also verse 28 of the same chapter in which Jesus said, “There shall be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” Moreover, Paul wrote, “God hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son” (Col. 1:13). Jesus himself “is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords (1 Tim. 6:15).

 

Divine Order of Government

 

Those familiar with secular government know that in a democracy the people rule either directly or through elected representatives. In an aristocracy the ruling class is composed of a few, but in a monarchy the king has all power, which he may delegate if he chooses. In a democracy there are three separate branches of government: the legislature, to make laws; a system of courts, the judiciary, to interpret the laws; and the executive branch composed of officials to enforce these laws. In a monarchy the legislative, judicial and executive powers are ALL vested in the king. So also it is in the divine order of government for the kingdom, the church. Of this divine kingdom Christ is King, ruling over his subjects who are members of his body, the church, and citizens of his kingdom (1 Cor. 12: 20, 2 7; Phil. 3: 20 ASV).

 

Jesus Has All Authority

Jesus said unto his disciples, “All power (or authority the American Standard Version says) is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Inspired by the Spirit, Paul wrote, “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power” (1 Cor. 15:24). Hence, Jesus now has “ALL RULE AND ALL AUTHORITY AND POWER.”

We must listen, therefore, to Jesus in all matters religious rather than to the ideas of human, fallible man who has no authority whatever since Christ has it all. Jesus further stated to h s disciples, after having declared that he had all authority, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Spirit-ASV): Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” (Matt. 28:19-20). Jesus in giving this worldwide commission stipulated the conditions of the apostles’ preaching, namely, they were to observe all things commanded them by him, and not by any man or group of men in conventions or synods.

 

Cause of Division

The reason so much religious confusion exists is because too many people take what some preacher says rather than listening to what Jesus and the apostles plainly teach in the scriptures. Following the transfiguration of our Lord, God spoke from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.” Let us listen to authorized teaching from the Son of God, who pleased well the Father and who has been given all authority in Christianity.

Protestantism apologizes for its divisions on the ground, “We can not all understand the Bible alike.” This is not true for when we understand anything, we must of necessity all understand it alike. Many people, however, misunderstand the Bible! What we need is more study and belief of just what the Bible says!

The underlying cause of division in the religious world is a lack of recognition of AUTHORITY. Groups of men convene to determine the practices of their denomination and forget or disregard the divine standard of authority, the teaching of Christ and the apostles contained in the New Testament. It should, though, ever be remembered that Jesus said for us to observe all things whatsoever he has taught. He has all authority! (Matt. 28:18; 1 Cor. 15:23.) Also, hear the words of Peter preached on Solomon’s porch, “For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; (Moses was speaking of Jesus) him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people” (Acts 3: 224-23) .

 

Innovations

 

Many members of denominations will admit that the Lord authorizes a certain act in a specific way but they say, “I don’t think it’s wrong to do it another way.” They then disregard divine authority and set themselves up as the end of all wisdom.

Pope Stephen II in 1311 introduced sprinkling as a substitute for scriptural immersion.

The New Testament teaches that baptism is a burial (Col. 2:12; Rom. 6:3-5), a going down into, a coming up out of the water (Acts 8:38-39; Mt. 3:16-17). Whether you accept sprinkling or immersion for Bible baptism is an index to whom or what you recognize as authoritative!

In 658 Pope Vitalianus introduced instrumental music to accompany the scripturally authorized singing of New Testament worship. These are the New Testament scriptures which authorize singing in acceptable worship to God: Rom. 15:9; 1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; Heb. 2:12 and 13:15 and James 5: 13. There is no authority in the New Testament to use mechanical instruments such as the organ, piano, trumpet, etc, in the worship of God.

Jesus said, “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mt. 15:9). Therefore, in subscribing to those doctrines and practices unauthorized by Christ and hence commanded by men, ones worship is in vain. No man has the right to make religious laws binding upon the church nor has any conference or council of men.

The word of Christ which is to dwell in us richly (Col. 3:16) and by which we are to live and ultimately be judged (John 12:48) is our authority in Christianity. Since we are to be judged by this divine standard, the teaching of the New Testament of Christ, let us diligently study it that our lives and religious practices may conform thereto.

 

Additional Innovations

 

1. Since 1910 churches of Christ have contributed, from the treasuries, to Orphan Home Corporations and Old Folks Home Corporations. There is not one passage in all the New Testament of Christ that authorizes the church to contribute to another organization except to a church of Christ which is in NEED (Acts 11:27-30; 1 Cor. 16:1-4; Romans 15:25-31; 2 Cor. 8 & 9). When men “go beyond that which is written,” (1 Cor. 4:6), and corrupt God’s plan for taking care of the needy their worship is in vain (Matt. 15: 1-9).

2. In recent years brethren have solicited and accepted church contributions to Colleges and Schools. There is not one scripture that teaches by precept or statement of fact, by approved example, or necessary inference that churches of Christ may contribute to an Educational Society. The beloved apostle wrote, “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God” (2 John 9).

3. During the David Lipscomb College Lectures in the Spring of 1960, “Prophet” Marshall Keeble said, “I prophesy that we’ll have Church of Christ Hospitals in the next few years.” Friends, there is no authority from Christ for such. Certainly Christians, as individuals, are to visit the sick for Jesus said, “I was sick, and ye visited me” (Mt. 25:36), but this does not authorize churches contributing to a church of Christ Hospital Corporation.

Indeed, all need to recognize the importance and seriousness of these matters and “continue steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine,” (Acts 2:42), and ever be content to “abide in the doctrine of Christ,” (2 John 9). Then when “we walk in the light, as he is in the light” we will “have fellowship one with another” (1 John 1: 7).

Truth Magazine VI: 2, pp. 22-24
November 1961