Truth Magazine

By Leon Mauldin

In his book, The Stone-Campbell Movement, Leroy Garrett sets forth in the first chapter the thesis of which he reminds his readers throughout the book, that the I ‘pioneer preachers” were reformers, not restorationists. “It should be noticed that these pioneers referred to their efforts as reformation, not restoration” (p. 6). Mr. Garrett defines the problem of restorationism in this way: “A restorationist rejects existing denominations as in any sense the church, ignores whatever has happened in intervening centuries, and insists upon restoring the primitive church. He assumes that the New Testament provides a fixed pattern for that church, and so there have been literally hundreds of sects, each claiming to be the true church” (p. 7).

According to Mr. Garrett, Campbell did not look to the New Testament as “providing an exact blueprint or pattern for the church, which he sought to ‘restore’ in an age when the church no longer existed” (p. 9). Mr. Garrett’s interpretation of history is that the work of Stone, Campbell, and others was basically that of a continuation of the reforms of such men as Martin Luther, and other reformers of the sixteenth century.

Actually, the beliefs and actions of the pioneer preachers does not establish what is right or wrong. That can only be established by the Word of God. Further, it is not our purpose to “restore” the “Restoration Movement. ” But it does seem that in his effort to prove his theology that Mr. Garrett overstates his case. He says that the concept, “We are out to restore the church, not to reform it” was ” not the view of the pioneers of the Stone-Campbell Movement” (p. 9).

While some of our readers perhaps have access to Lard’s Quarterly, no doubt many do not. Moses E. Lard was well acquainted with Alexander Campbell. His biographer, Van Deusen, said that while a student at Bethany College, Moses Lard and his wife were given the building that housed the printing office of the Millennial Harbinger. It was only about 200 feet from the Campbell home. “Lard was able to have a relationship with Campbell that no other student at Bethany ever enjoyed. After four years of this intimate association, it could be said that nobody understood the mind of Campbell as well as Moses E. Lard” (Moses Lard, That Prince of Preachers, p. 58). Campbell’s own estimation of Lard may be seen in that when the Baptist Jeremiah B. Jeter penned Campbellism Examined, a vicious attack on Campbell and his beliefs, Campbell selected Lard to write the refutation, Review of Campbellism Examined (297 pages).

We mention these matters to show that Moses E. Lard was in a position to speak with some knowledge and authority concerning what he, Campbell, and other such preachers were trying to accomplish. In an article entitled, “Have We Not Become A Sect?”, Lard addresses himself to some of the same issues as does Garrett regarding the goals they were trying to accomplish. Interestingly, Mr. Lard’s perspective is not the same as that which Mr. Garrett attributes to the pioneer preachers.

Lard wrote, “We are sometimes termed Reformers, and the work in which we are engaged the Reformation, and sometimes in an accommodated sense we thus term ourselves and our work. What does the language mean? I have long been convinced that it carries a false import. The word Reformers, as applied to us, means simply a new kind of sectarians, and the word Reformation the work and principles of a new sect. But this is far from the sense in which we use them. In what sense, then, if at all, are we reformers? Certainly not in this, that we propose merely to reform existing so called sects and parties (emphasis mine, LM). When reformed, they would still fall immeasurably below the work we wish to see effected. This work done, and we should have neither sects nor sectarians, but only the church of Christ and Christians. . .”

“I doubt not the word Reformers was first applied to us because it was supposed that we intended merely to reform the Baptist denomination, with which many of our brethren originally stood connected; but we never proposed to reform that denomination. The reformation we proposed looked solely to individual Christians and not to denominations. Many Baptists we then regarded, and still regard as sincere Christians (i.e. Lard did not think they needed to be re-baptized, a view with which I would disagree, LM), but as in error in several things. In these things we proposed a reformation; but at the same time we required an abandonment of all party connections, names, and peculiarities. We proposed that the Baptists should be Christians simply, and should cease to be Baptists; and that they should belong to the church of Christ only, and not to the Baptist denomination. In only a very restricted sense, therefore, can we be termed reformers; and that a sense which in no respect distinguishes us from the simplest and purest type of Christians.”

Lard continued, “But in this sense we are not Reformers, neither is the work in which we are engaged a Reformation. Indeed, our work is strictly a Formation and not a Reformation. We are laboring solely to build up the church of Christ, and neither to build nor, rebuild, form nor reform, any thing different from it” (Lard’s Quarterly; March 1864, pp. 257, 258).

Furthermore, regarding Mr. Garrett’s assertion that Campbell did not view the New Testament “as providing an exact blueprint or pattern for the church” consider Lard’s closing remarks in the same preceding article: “Finally, we accept as the matter of our faith precisely and only what the Bible teaches, rejecting everything else; and in our practice endeavor to conform strictly to what it, and it alone, enjoins either in precept or in precedent. In life and heart we aim to be all and purely what it requires. We wear no name which it does not sanction; and repudiate all sects, parties, and apostasies, as well as any and every conceivable form of connection with them. If, then, we are still a sect, I submit it to the candid reader, whether, upon any ground known to him, he can acquit the apostles and primitive Christians of that offensive charge?” (p. 259) Clearly, Moses Lard would not agree with Mr. Garrett’s assessment of the motives and work of the pioneer preachers.

Another related recurring concept Mr. Garrett proposes is, “History clearly demonstrates that restorationism by its very nature is divisive” (p. 10). Therefore, he views those who regard the New Testament as a pattern for churches today to be responsible for religious division. He especially charges the churches of Christ as being found guilty. He refers to churches of Christ as exclusivists. In pages 601-610, the words “exclusivist” or “exclusivism” are found no less than ten times! While reading the annoying repetitions the question occurred to me as to whether Mr. Garrett either owned or had access to a Thesaurus.

Careful readers can see that words such as “exclusivism” and “legalism” (the use of which also frequently occurs) are used to put in a bad light those who believe in strict adherence to the Word of God. Such language depreciates obedience to Christ. Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out demons, and by thy name do many mighty works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matt. 7:21-23). Any problems with “exclusivism” is a problem with Jesus, not with pioneer preachers.

In the New Testament, those, and only those, who obeyed Jesus’ conditions of salvation were regarded as Christians. They were not over wrought because they were “exclusively” Christians. We have not the power to tamper with the gate that leads to life, to adjust it any wider or narrower than Jesus designed it.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 22, pp. 674, 695
November 19, 1987

By S. Leonard Tyler

Improper use of drugs whether it be the weed, powder, liquid or pills is bad news. The sad, tragic stories fill-up our news papers, challenge our peace officers and fill our court rooms with victims and broken-hearted mother, father, brother and sister. The judges belabor the tasks placed upon them to find the answer, what is best? The problem grows worse and worse.

The solution can not come from the officers, courts, judges or jails. This is not belittling any of these officials or institutions. We need them. They have a vital place to fill and may they be aware and fill it well. But their efforts can never solve the problem. We need, and must awake to the reality, every avenue of influence to protect, salvage and encourage all boys, girls, men and women to kick the habit and build a new attitude toward life.

The answer must come from the home basically and fundamentally. If the home is corrupted and fails to teach, train and set the right example, the problem becomes intensified and a cure must be sought rather than a prevention. The home must be awakened to the intensiveness of the drugs, alcohol being one of them. These are not pleasurable items but destructive, mind cluttering and destroying.

The Bible teaching should be the very source of right standards, attitudes and directions for a clean, wholesome, pure, active and accomplishing life, even to the spiritual purity and hospitable manner of seeking to lead all men to Jesus the Savior. “The truth shall make you free.”

Every media of communication must be employed to help teach the facts regarding drugs and alcohol. Why do I put alcohol in at every opportunity? Because it is not only neglected but, so many times and by so many, thought of a means of getting off of other drugs. It is not a means of breaking the drug addiction. It is a drug characterized in its addiction – alcoholism. Alcoholism is one of our major drug problems. It is associated with more automobile accidents, more wounded and more deaths, as the news usually reads, “Alcohol-related.” Think on the following.

An editorial appeared recently in the Longview (TX) News-Journal under “Drugs and Len Bias’ Death.” He started with quotes from a friend about Len, “So full of life. Fun to be with. His jokes were the best. Hard to believe they’re carrying him away now.” The editorial added, “Well, the fun is over. The jokes are no more. Life is gone.” The Drug which was supposedly to give a high – gave death!

“They carried 22-year-old Len Bias away because he was dead, the victim of a cocaine-induced heart stoppage. In stead of playing basketball for the world champion Boston Celtics, Bias has been consigned to his grave.”

A news item, the recent cocaine-related death of Len Bias and Don Rogers should make all of us think but may it help our young men to avoid the stuff. It is damning.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 21, p. 655
November 5, 1987

By William C. Sexton

Word has arrived with great sorrow, grief and shame that one of my brothers, a preacher of the gospel, has “committed adultery.” My head hangs low, my heart and mind is filled with heaviness; a group of people are shocked, a family is hurt deeply; a life is drifting on a sea of trouble – unsure at this moment as to whether survival is possible or not.

Adding to the heartache is the fact that this is not the only case of this sort that has come to me this year, or in recent months! A year ago I sat with this brother and others in a gathering of many people singing songs of praise to the Lord, teaching and admonishing one another of spiritual values, etc. This brother was evidently really concerned about saving souls. What happened? Satan, knowing of the strength of the sexual drive went to work, effectively blinding the eyes to the danger and, in time, the drive was activated in sin! Satan had succeeded! The “pleasure of sin” had ruled to ruin; a moment of gratification is followed with a lifetime of regret, shame, heartache, and suspicion!

In my thirty years as an active, concerned observer of Christian behavior I have developed an attitude that makes it exceedingly hard to be sympathetic toward this particular sin among preachers. Yet, I am not so “self-righteous” that I know that such could never happen to me; but, I truly believe that if such should, the same behavior toward me is appropriate and approved by God! Do not misunderstand me: I love this person, as I know God does, and forgiveness is obtained upon repentance and confession, as this person has done – as he states. However, I’m not in agreement with what I have seen happening in the last few years; a preacher is “caught,” he makes confession and continues to preach! Beloved, I challenge you to consider seriously the “fruits” of this behavior.

David – Forgiven But Consequences Follow

David was a man “after God’s own heart,” but he committed this evil, adultery (cf. 2 Sam. 12:1-14). When he owns up to it, he is told, “The Lord hath put away thy sin.” Yet, he is informed that consequences will follow him to his grave.

Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die (v. 14). Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me (v. 10).

When a preacher commits this sin, he can and will be forgiven when and if he really repents, confessing the same. Yet, consequences will follow him to his grave, and we need to be aware of that. In my judgment, when such is committed, confessed and things continue as “usual,” as nothing had happened, we do a great disservice to ourselves, God’s people, and the preacher involved!

When such is done, I suggest to you that it lends Satan a sword with which he will continue to slay us!

This lends to the idea – one can commit sin with but a “little” hand slap! Beloved, David got more than a little slap on the hand; he suffered the rest of his life, and God left it on record for all to read and fear!

I have said more than once: the best thing that can happen for a child when he gets into trouble, steals, lies, etc., is for him to get caught and disciplined! Otherwise, he’ll be reinforced in his “getting by with” the crime. Many are the passages which point to action being taken before all, “that all may fear” (cf. 1 Tim. 5:20; Tit. 1:13).

A Preacher Who Commits “Adultery” May Preach Again, But. . .

Paul was reluctant to take Mark with him on the second journey, because he had failed on the first – although later, after he had proved himself, evidently Paul could and did recommend him (Acts 15:36-41; Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11; Phile. v. 24). 1 feel the same about a preacher, who has thus failed! In time, when he has had time and has actually proven that he will do this sin is no more” (cf. Eph. 4:28), then he should be give a “second chance.” To place him back in the pulpit immediately, however, in my judgment cannot but have a deteriorating effect on all concerned.

To take this attitude and commend this action is not to show a lack of love for the person involved; neither is it to become the punisher. Rather, I believe it is to act responsibly, desiring to recognize the damage that is done by such sinful action and to be governed by God, working to the end that the “occasion” to sin in this fashion will be less than it would be otherwise.

Knowing something of the development of character, I find it hard to see how a man can go out and have sexual intercourse with one other than his wife and then come and stand in the pulpit and proclaim the word without repenting and then go repeat that sin – such a person needs time and to see the need to be rehabilitated! One who can do that is unfit to be in the pulpit for a time – till he is able to prove that he has been reformed! I believe that to take another stand, one allowing more liberty is unwise, and harmful!

A Challenge

Brethren, I by no means want to be setting myself up as a guard, wise and self-righteous, knowing more than others or having more self-control than others. I am deeply concerned that in the past, members of the church – elders, and others concerned for the “love principle” in treatment of such behavior -have in fact encouraged repeated action by, in a sense, over-looking the gravity of the sin. It’s somewhat like ignoring a child’s behavior, and trying to help him without pressing the point, so he will learn not to so act!

Parents who slap the hand and then immediately try to “kiss the hurt away,” do their children a great harm – failing to see the healing and corrective power in the “hurt” process. I ask all to think seriously about this matter. With God’s help, as we seek it in prayer and study of his word, let us stand up for right! Let us extend our hand of forgiveness to all who so desire it, but let us not lend encouragement to such action – we’ll only see more if we do.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 21, pp. 654-655
November 5, 1987

By Ronny Milliner

The problem of unfaithfulness to the Lord has apparently been around for a long time. David began the twelfth psalm by saying, “Help, Lord, for the godly man ceases! For the faithful disappear from among the sons of men” (Psa. 12:1). Many centuries ago the wise man was asking, “But who can find a faithful man?” (Prov. 20:6b) Today the problem of unfaithfulness is found in nearly every congregation of God’s people.

Surely we all know that God requires faithfulness of us. Paul states the principle in 1 Corinthians 4:2 when he wrote, “Moreover it is required in stewards that one be found faithful.” And how many times have we been reminded of the words of our Savior as recorded by John in Revelation 2:10b, “Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life”?

And surely we know what faithfulness is? We have no problem determining faithfulness in every day life. A car that only starts one out of three times is not a faithful car. A newspaper boy that delivers your paper three days out of the week is not very faithful. An employee that shows up late for work or slacks on the job is not a faithful employee. A refrigerator that made ice one week and then skipped two or three weeks before working again would not be considered faithful refrigerator. No, our problem is not with misunderstanding of the meaning of faithfulness.

To impress us with the importance of faithfulness we could notice some of the various expressions which are used to encourage us to faithfulness. When Jesus spoke of enduring “to the end” in Matthew 10:22 he was talking about faithfulness. When he declared in John 8:31, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed” he was showing the necessity of faithfulness. When it is recorded that Barnabas encouraged the brethren to “continue with the Lord” (Acts 11:23), he was encouraging them to faithfulness. The same is also true when some were encouraged “to continue in the grace of God” in Acts 13:43 and “to continue in the faith” in Acts 14:22. When Paul wrote in Romans 2:67 about “those who by patient continuance in doing good,” he was speaking of faithfulness. When he exhorted the Corinthians to “be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord” (1 Cor. 15:58), he was exhorting them to faithfulness. To “stand fast in the faith” (1 Cor. 16:13) and to “not grow weary while doing good” (Gal. 6:9) are other expressions which refer to faithfulness. The Hebrew writer speaks of holding “the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end” (Heb. 3:14) and holding “fast the confession of our hope without wavering” (Heb. 10:23). In doing so he simply was speaking of faithfulness. When James says, “Blessed is the man who endures temptation” (Jas. 1: 12), he was speaking of the blessedness of faithfulness. Peter’s urging you to be “more diligent to make your calling and election sure” (2 Pet. 1:10) is an exhortation to faithfulness. Every time Jesus speaks of “him who overcomes” in the seven letters to the churches of Asia (Rev. 2:7,11,17,26; 3:5,12,21) he is speaking of faithfulness.

We could also talk about the different areas in which faithfulness is needed. Yet most of us are aware that we need to be faithful in our praying, studying the Bible, worshiping together, contributing, teaching others the gospel, restoring the erring, setting priorities, doing good, etc. Most of us have heard sermon after sermon on these topics and are as familiar with the Bible passages on these items as the preacher is. Yet unfaithfulness abounds.

Therefore I would like to direct your thoughts in a different direction. I want you to think about who is hurt by your unfaithfulness. Yes, your unfaithfulness is hurting several people.

Self

Of course, it should be obvious that your unfaithfulness is hurting yourself. Jesus warned in Luke 19:62, “No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” In Matthew 24:45-51 Jesus shows that upon the master’s return the unfaithful servant is cut “in two” and appointed a “portion with the hypocrites” where “there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

Not only will you be in misery in eternity, but your life here will not be pleasant as well. Peter wrote, “For he who would love life and see good days, Let him refrain his tongue from evil, And his lips from speaking guile; Let him turn away from evil and do good; Let him seek peace and pursue it” (1 Pet. 3:10-11). There are a lot of Christians who have just enough religion to make them miserable.

Yet you may not care about yourself, so consider others who are hurt by your unfaithfulness.

The Saved

Paul had a great interest in his brethren. In 2 Corinthians 11:28 he spoke of his “deep concern for all the churches.” True Christians have an interest in their fellow brethren. Your unfaithfulness causes grief and discouragement to the saved.

My wife and I had a couple of close friends who were a great encouragement to us in the work of the gospel. When times were rough these two Christians were always there to give a pat on the back. The woman was one of the best writers of Bible stories for children that I have ever seen. Now they have I become unfaithful to the Lord. It brings tears to our eyes to think of them in their present condition. Yes, your unfaithfulness hurts other Christians.

Another way that your unfaithfulness may hurt other Christians is by your actions causing unbelievers to blaspheme the church because of your hypocrisy. We must be careful about our influence “so that the name of God and his doctrine may not be blasphemed” (1 Tim. 6:1). Many have been the times when talking to others about their souls that these individuals have criticized the whole church just because of some who were unfaithful in it.

Your unfaithfulness also brings grief to those shepherds of the flock of God. The Hebrew writer commanded, “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you” (Heb. 13:17).

Special Loved Ones

Think of the grief you cause your parents or children, husband or wife, etc. because they know if you were to die in this unfaithful state that there would be no hope. Paul did not want the Thessalonians to be “as others who have no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13). I have seen parents have to bury a son who had become unfaithful to the Lord and had even taken his own life. Such is not a pleasant experience.

Job was concerned about the spiritual well being of his children. The Bible says, “Job would send and sanctify them, and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all” (Job 1:4-5). It’s very unlikely that your children will turn out to be faithful after observing your example of unfaithfulness. The couple of which

I spoke before have three beautiful children. The boy, as is often the case with youngsters, decided he wanted to imitate me and be a preacher of the gospel. Of course I encouraged him as I had the opportunity. But now the chances of that happening are very slim. The chances of these three precious souls becoming Christians grow dimmer as their parents’ example of unfaithfulness is held before them day after day.

Brethren, those of you who are unfaithful, listen to me. It will not matter what the preacher says in way of trying to comfort your family if you die in a state of unfaithfulness. You will be responsible for the heartache they experience at that time.

The Shakey

Your unfaithfulness can also be a cause of stumbling for some weak brother or new convert. Jesus warned in Matthew 18:6-7, “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offenses comes!” Paul said we need to resolve “not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way” (Rom. 14:13) and to “give no offense, either to Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God” (1 Cor. 10:32-33).

Instead of being a source of discouragement and an influence for evil, why not “let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven” (Mt. 5:16)?

The Savior

One’s unfaithfulness can be the cause of others blaspheming God. This truth certainly can be seen in the example of the Jews. Because of their failure to practice what they preached Paul wrote, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (Rom. 2:21-24).

Ezekiel declared that God has “no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from this way and live” (Ezek. 33:11). God desires your salvation, not your damnation (2 Pet. 3:9).

When Jesus looked over the city of Jerusalem and pondered the lost condition of the multitude of souls within it, tears came to his eyes (Lk. 19:41). As the Savior observes your life, is He smiling or crying?

Conclusion

Dear brother, the end of it all will either be either eternal reward or eternal punishment (Rev. 21:7-8). Do you not want to hear the words, “Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord” (Matt. 25:21)?

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 21, pp. 658-659
November 5, 1987