Truth Magazine

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord (Proverbs 17:15 NKJV).

The balance demanded of the Lord – neither justifying the wicked nor condemning the just – is not always easy to maintain. This is especially so in our dealings with religious people, even our own brethren. Easy or not, it is a balance for which Christians must strive. The ability to strike that balance comes through study, growth, and spiritual exercise (cf. Heb. 5:14). Through these, one learns to look at things more as the Lord does – seeing good as good and evil as evil.

Brethren constantly damage the Lord’s cause by neither understanding nor striving for this balance. The disposition of many finds a way to condemn others regardless of the good that is in them, while the temperament of others is to justify brethren regardless to the wickedness that is in them. Still others are apt to do both.

I hear praise for individuals because “they never see any evil in anyone.” One gets the impression that this must be the greatest of all virtues. It is really? Could it be that backbiting and gossip have caused many of us to flop to the opposite extreme?

Justifying the wicked is not the greatest trait that one can develop. One does not have to be a super-critic who condemns even the just; nor does one have to a super-conciliator who finds a way to justify even the wicked.

Preachers can be found without such balance in their preaching and dealing with their fellow man. They may have developed one extreme or the other by misunderstanding the “whole counsel of God.” They may have succumbed to the constant pressure to preach the gospel in a way that reflects the prevailing mood of those who support them. If the supporters tend to justify the wicked, then so does the preaching. If the supporters tend to condemn the just, then so does the preaching. Regardless of how either extreme comes about, the church is hurt when the preaching it receives and/or supports is turned predominately in either direction.

One aspect of the overall problem may be a misunderstanding and/or misapplication of terms. One may excuse and/or justify the wicked because he has a different view of “just,” “righteous,” wicked,” “abomination” than God. We may think of these terms in the light of our own thinking and that of those around us rather than from God’s perspective.

The super-critic equates “righteous” or “just” with near absolute perfection. It does not take long for this man to condemn as wicked almost everyone (but himself, of course) because he can find perfection in no one. The Lord’s righteous man or just man is one made so by the pardon that comes through the blood of Christ when one obeys from the heart the gospel of Christ (Rom. 6:3,4,17; Acts 2:38; 22:16). He is kept righteous or just by practicing righteousness (I John 3:7), confessing his sins (1 John 1:9), and asking God’s forgiveness (Acts 8:22). He may even show unwise judgment in word and deed in some matter without sinning (cf. 1 Cor. 7:36-38). Further, the super-critic tends not to give another the benefit of a doubt before passing judgment.

The super-conciliator equates “wicked” or “abominable” with near total depravity. “Wicked” and “abominable” are reserved for the lowest forms of immorality, if ever used at all. Maybe he should examine some wicked in the New Testament:

In both the parables of the talents and pounds (minas NKJV) the unfaithful servants were called wicked. They were not murderers, robbers, adulterers, or the like; they simply ignored the authority of the master. They did not carry out the expressed will of the master – thus were disobedient (Matt. 25:26; Luke 19:22).

Simon, in Acts 8:22, was guilty of wickedness when he tried to buy the power of God with money.

A brother who married his father’s wife was a wicked person (1 Cor. 5:17).

Jesus warned some, “For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God” (Luke 16:15). So, man and God may not have the same list of abominations. Some of God’s abominations may be high on religious men’s lists of virtues.

One needs to be careful in passing judgment upon others because Jesus said, “Judge not that you be not judged” (Matt. 7:1). Jesus also tells us to judge righteously (John 7:24). There may be times that one simply withholds judgment, neither condemning nor justifying. He is simply in no position to know the facts in the matter.

However, one needs to understand God considers both those who justify the wicked and those who condemn the just equally abominable before Him. God through Isaiah put it rather strongly by saying: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitterl Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!” (Isa. 5:20,21).

There are basically two ways that one may go about justifying the wicked. (1) He may not see their conduct as wickedness. He agrees that the deed in question was done, but does not believe it to be wrong. (2) He may see the conduct as sinful, but finds ways to excuse the person for having done the deed. He may even tell himself that he is acting out of love for the offender. How loving is it to let people continue in their wickedness without having to face up to the responsibility and consequences of it? In either case he has justified the wicked.

There are basically three ways that one may go about condemning the just. (1) He understands what is done, but May think it is something a Christian has no right to do. His lack of knowledge and discernment causes him to condemn what God allows. (2) He does not really understand what is done because he bases his judgment upon insufficient evidence and/or hasty judgment. (3) He may not be able to condemn what is done, but imagines without evidence, it to be done from wicked motives.

I stand amazed at brethren who will freely admit that certain brethren are guilty of unrepented of wickedness -immorality, worldliness, compromise, destructive heresies and general unfaithfulness. The evidence is open, sufficient, and so strong that even those who refuse to rebuke them have to admit that the thing was done. They will find some way to say that such may be so, but . . . … They simply cannot find the courage to deal with these brethren as unfaithful, as compromisers, as worldlings and as teachers of destructive heresies. They are often more critical of those who do recognize and deal with such brethren in a way that the Bible teaches they should.

I stand just as a amazed at many who upon flimsy and often contradictory bits of evidence think they must inform the brotherhood that a certain brother or church has departed from the faith. If brethren everywhere do not share their judgment in the matter, then woe be to them! These seem to be unwilling to consider that they just might have misinterpreted the “evidence” at hand. They are not willing to consider that what may seem to be clear evidence might not be as clear to another.

There might be little disagreement as to how we should treat the brother or church in question – if indeed they are guilty as charged. The Bible is sufficiently clear, complete and confirmed. All brethren have equal access to this information in it. If one has indeed violated its teachings then he should be dealt with accordingly. Yet, the evidence of what was actually done in the incident(s) in question may not be so clear, complete, reliable and readily accessible. That is why we have hung juries and mistrials in civil law. It is not that the law is vague, but the evidence as to what actually happened may be. So, we need to be careful that we do not “condemn the just.”

In all cases one would do well to study the Bible to better discern between good and evil. He needs to practice applying it to real life situations, having the wisdom and courage to call evil “evil” and good “good” wherever he finds it – even among religious people.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, pp. 291-292
May 21, 1987

By Tom M. Roberts

The Monastic concept is a withdrawal from life, a retreat to cloistered walls and inner contemplation that isolates one from contemporaries in a sinful world.

The Gnostic concept is a participation in sinful life with the physical body but a philosophical denial of the reality of guilt to the spiritual being.

Both concepts are extremes, wide of the mark, and harmful to Christian living.

Of Jesus, it is said, “And Jesus advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man” (Luke 2:52). As a youngster, Jesus was a part of His community. As was the custom, Jesus was taught a trade, His father’s carpentry. After Jesus began His mighty deeds, His townsmen were astonished at His teaching, saying, “. . . What is the wisdom that is given unto this man, what mean such mighty works wrought by his hands? is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary. . . ?” (Mark 6:2-3) Throughout Jesus’ ministry, He was among the people, saint and sinner alike. He was charged with eating and consorting with sinners. This was certainly true, insofar as it is stated. But it must be realized to be true to Jesus’ character that He was teaching sinners and that His association with them in no way should be taken as condoning any sin. The much-divorced woman at the Samaritan well (John 4) was surprised to find a Jewish man discussing the issues of life with her. So taken was she with the force of His discussion that she introduced Him to her village and this “chance” encounter led to others knowing about Jesus. The woman taken in adultery (John 8) found Jesus as her defender against her “kangaroo court” accusers but learned clearly that He did not countenance adultery. Jesus’ feet were washed by a sinful woman (Luke 7:37ff), He ate with publicans and sinners (Luke 5:29ff), walked among the Gerasenes (Mark 5), healed lepers (Matt. 115), praised a centurion (Luke 7:9), was acquainted with the rich and poor, and, as the full record indicates, walked on main street during His life both by example and teaching. As Paul later explained to Agrippa when teaching about Jesus: “for this hath not been done in a corner” (Acts 26:26). Jesus lived where the people lived, talked their language, worked a trade, mixed and mingled in the streets of their villages, exhorted them to love God, rebuked their sins, and left us an example that we “should follow in his steps” (1 Pet. 2:21).

Main Street, in most American towns, is a thoroughfare that bisects the main business district. It is representative of the place where people congregate to conduct the affairs of life. Symbolically, Jesus did His work on “main street” in Galilee and Judea. He was not ashamed of His life or teaching, did not attempt to disguise it, did not retreat to Masada nor join with the Hellenists. He went to the people with His message, but remained uniquely and unerringly Jesus, the Son of God.

For us to be effective, we must take the same approach, today. The gospel message is for people. While realizing the value of technology (printed page, radio, television), it yet remains that we should interact with our neighbors with the gospel of Christ. We cannot expect the preacher to reach all the lost from the pulpit. Radio, television and newspaper contacts must still be approached by individuals for personal study. Jesus made the apostles “fishers of men” and we should be no less. But how do we go about it?

Brethren, we do it like Jesus did, by taking to Main Street, U.S.A. Not superficially, of course, like Madison Avenue with a product to sell. But with Christ in our hearts, on a day-to-day basis, as we interact with our fellow-citizens in all manner of possible scenarios. Where do you buy gas? Where do you bank? Where do you buy groceries? Who is your dentist, doctor, mechanic? Who is your neighbor, sister-in-law, cousin, aunt, uncle? Who do you visit in the hospitals, play golf with, have coffee with, car-pool together? Are you in the PTA? Do you belong to the Lion’s Club? Do you belong to professional societies? Are you an architect, engineer, doctor, lawyer? Do you baby-sit, do volunteer work, work in a store or office? Regardless, the one common denominator in all these instances (and multitudes more) is people. And people need the gospel. And you have it.

I’m not suggesting that we all become obnoxious and pushy with our understanding of the truth. I realize that there are circumstances where we cannot actually do a lot of teaching. But it is possible to leave good tracts at many places, with many people. (Do you keep tracts in your car pocket, briefcase, purse?) It is possible to invite people to worship where you attend. It is possible to advertise a gospel meeting with a personal invitation to go with you. It is possible to exert a godly influence by your conversation, deportment, speech and attitudes. With Christ in our hearts, He goes with us when we go out on Main Street. When we meet someone, Christ meets them, too. When we conduct business, Christ is a part of the transaction. He should even be with us in our times of recreation. Does Jesus go on vacation with you or do you leave him behind in the “church building”? See what I mean? I fear that we have lost our effectiveness because we want the preacher, or some kind of technology, or someone else, to do the converting. We give our money in the collection plate and want the church to grow. The church doesn’t grow; therefore, the preacher isn’t working. But isn’t it really altogether too true that we have attempted to shut Jesus up in the “church building” and only come to visit an hour or two a week? It is almost like we have confined Jesus to prison with limited visitation privileges. Folks, you won’t find Jesus in a church building unless Christ is in the heart of those who attend there. And if Christ is in their hearts, He will be with them when they leave the building and go out into the world, back to Main Street. It is there that Christians become a force with which to be reckoned. When persecuted in the first century, the disciples “went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). Christ in us . . . we in the world. In this manner, we are salt and light (Matt. 5:13-16), giving a distinctive flavor to life even while letting our light shine. Let’s be ready to follow Jesus right into life’s pathways. Let’s not shrink from life, fearful from its contact, nor join in its sinful practices, heedless of the deadliness of sin. But rather, let us “show forth the excellencies, of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Pet. 2:9).

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, pp. 295, 312
May 21, 1987

By Johnny Stringer

I have often heard covetousness defined as the desire for something that belongs to someone else. I do not believe this definition is correct. Thayer defines Pleonexia, translated “covetousness”) as “a greedy desire.” To covet something is not just to desire it, but to have a greedy desire. It is to desire something too much, attaching so much importance to it that it is an idol to you (Eph. 5:5; Col. 3:5). You are covetous if you desire something so much that you would sin in order to obtain it or so much that you cannot be content without it. Whether or not the thing you desire belongs to someone else has nothing to do with it.

It is possible to desire something that belongs to someone else, yet not be guilty of covetousness. Did you ever buy anything? Probably so. Why did you buy it? Probably because you desired it. Did it belong to someone else? Yes, it belonged to whomever you bought it from. So you desired something that belonged to someone else; therefore you bought it. If covetousness were merely the desire for something that belonged to someone else, you would have been guilty of covetousness when you desired the thing you later bought. Everything you see in a store belongs to someone. Are you guilty of covetousness any time you want something you see in a store?

I used to hear that if you desire what belongs to someone else, you are covetous. Hence, if someone has something you like, you should not desire his; instead, you should desire another one just like it. But if there is an object like the one that belongs to the other person, it, also, probably belongs to someone else. The real point is, you do not want to take something from someone who does not want to give it up. If you want to take it from him against his will, then you desire it too much; hence, you are guilty of covetousness.

Suppose someone owns some property in just the location where you want to build. You do not want property just like it somewhere else; you want that particular property. Or suppose you collect stamps and you know someone who owns a stamp that is the only one of its kind in the world. You do not want a stamp like that one; you want that particular stamp.

Are you covetous because you desire the property or stamp belonging to someone else? Not necessarily. If the person will not sell you the stamp or the property, are you content without it? Or do you attach so. much importance to it that you will not be content without it, but will resort to whatever means are necessary to get it. The answers to these questions determine whether or not you are covetous. How strong is your desire for the object? How important is it to you? Is it a greedy desire?

Not only can we desire something that belongs to someone else without being covetous, but we can be covetous in our desire for things that do not belong to anyone else. Suppose, for example, the holder of a political office dies leaving the office vacant. A special election is held to fill the office. The office belongs to no one. You want it so badly that you are willing to lie or do just about anything else to get it. In that case, you covet the office; you desire it too much. Your desire for something that does not belong to anyone else is covetous.

So you see, covetousness is not merely the desire for something that belongs to someone else. It is a greedy desire that grows out of thinking a man’s life consists of the things he possesses (Lk. 12:15). “Take heed, and beware of covetousness.”

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, p. 301
May 21, 1987

By Kenneth E. Thomas

According to an article in The Bradenton Herald recently, Mr. David B. Barrett, who is styled as a scholar of the Church of England, states that “Currently, of the world’s 4.8 billion people, there are 1.6 billion Christians, 837 million Moslems, 661 million Hindus, 300 million Buddhists, 457 million of other religions, 825 million non-religious and 213 million atheists.”

So many people accept or reject their religious beliefs and practices on the basis of the number who embrace a creed. For example: I have had countless people say to me, “How many people believe as you do on this subject?” My response has always been, “What difference does that make?” The number of people who believe something isn’t the standard by which the truth or falsity of a matter is determined! If a thing is taught in God’s word, it is true if no one believes it! By the same token, if it isn’t taught therein, 837 million believing it doesn’t make it true! Nor is it false because 661 million reject it!

There are all total, if we take Mr. Barrett’s figures lumped together of the Eastern religions (not counting the Jews), 1.798 billion people who reject Jesus as the Christ, and the only prophet of God for these last days as Moses said in Deuteronomy 18:15-18; Acts 3:22-23; Acts 7:37. Do these staggering figures invalidate the biblical facts that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and the world’s only Savior (Matt. 16:16-19; John 14:1-6)? Most believers at this point show an inconsistency because they continue believing on Jesus even in the face of being in such a minority. You and I know that the numbers given above concerning the number of “Christians” in the world doesn’t really tell the tale of how many really are Christians. It lumps together all members of all Protestant and Catholic denominations. One may “join” any and every denomination in town and still not have accepted God’s saving grace through Christ and obedience to the gospel to be forgiven of alien sins and be thereby added to the Lord’s church (Acts 2:22-38, 41, 47; 3:19; 4:11-12; John 3:3-5; Acts 8:26-39; 1 Pet. 3:20-21; Jas. 1:21-25; 2:14-26; Mark 16:15-16; Luke 24:45-49).

Noah preached to his generation while preparing the giant boat (ark) and most of the world rejected his warning of a great flood which was soon to inundate the whole world (Gen. 6:5-22; 7; 2 Pet. 2:5). Later in speaking of how God blesses those who are obedient to His will, Peter said, “When once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in the which few, that is, eight souls were saved through water. There is an anti-type which now saves us, namely baptism. . . ” (1 Pet. 3:20-21). Only eight believed God’s warning and prepared for the flood. All flesh outside the ark died any way. Few believe baptism is essential to one being saved from alien sins, but still it is true (Acts 2:38; Tit. 3:5).

There are many Bible truths which few believe and accept as recorded in the will of Christ, the New Testament. We hold the views we do based on what the will of, Christ teaches in one of three ways: (1) Command, precept or statement; (2) Approved apostolic example; (3) Necessary inference. Then we recognize two kinds of authority, general and specific. General authority includes all of the items in a class; specific authority restricts to exactly what has been specified.

The following is a partial list of things the Bible teaches which faithful Christians accept as do faithful congregations of the Lord’s people as matters of faith, which the majority of religious people around us in the Protestant and Catholic churches reject. Not only this, so do our “liberal” brethren in a number of these things!

(1) Weekly observance of the Lord’s supper as well as only on Sunday the Lord’s day (Acts 20:6-7; 1 Cor. 11:26-29; Matt. 26:26-29; Luke 22:16-20). Why do you suppose only a few are willing to be guided by what the Scriptures teach in this matter? Does the fact that some partake quarterly or each month or once a year somehow alter God’s will in this matter? No! (2 John 9; Matt. 15:8-9; Col. 2:20-22).

(2) Only vocal music in worship both individually and collectively (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; 1 Cor. 14:15; Jas. 5:13; etc.). You see God didn’t say, make music. He said sing! That is specific and may only be obeyed by doing what He has specified. Doing otherwise is to add another kind of music than the music Christ authorizes and this is a serious matter (Rev. 22:18-19; 2 John 9). Now I am aware that only a few of us believe this, but still it is true if the whole world rejects it.

(3) Finance the Lord’s work primarily by a free will offering of the membership into a common treasury on the first day of each week (1 Cor. 16:1-2; 2 Cor. 8, 9). 1 know denominations around us and some of our “liberal” brethren have a different practice concerning raising of funds on which to operate “their” religious organizations, still tithing and any other method of financing the Lord’s work went out with the close of the Old Testament or when Christ condemned following the doctrines of men (Matt. 15:9; Col. 2:14; Gal. 5:4). Other methods work and the majority of our religious friends practice many methods, still the faithful Christian is willing to “walk by faith” and limit himself to that which is authorized by Christ (2 Cor. 5:7; Rom. 10:17; Heb. 11:4).

(4) No organization larger, smaller or other than the local congregation exists by Christ’s authority to function in “church” work (Phil. 1:1; Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28-32; 1 Pet. 5:14; Heb. 13:7, 17). We therefore reject the denominational idea of a head of the church on earth with headquarters to which all member denominations look for direction and doctrinal changes from time to time. We likewise as quickly reject our “liberal” brethren’s “sponsoring church” (eldership) concept which ties churches together in much the same way as do synods, conferences and councils, etc. in the denominations around us (2 John 9-11).

(5) As a proper name, we refuse to be called anything but a Christian. I know that folks are aware that this name is just fine for one to wear and that it is what followers of Christ were originally called by divine decree (Isa. 62:2; 56:5; 1 Tim. 3:15; Acts 11:26b; 1 Pet. 4:16; Acts 4:11-12; 1 Cor. 1: 10- 12; Acts 26:28). Sometimes we say that “we are Christians only and only Christians.” You cannot improve on that! Other names cause the world to see the difference among us. Salvation is only in the name of Christ (Acts 4:12). You cannot glorify God wearing any other name (1 Pet. 4:16). So what if the majority of believers in Christ do not wear this name exclusively, does that make their man-given name right in God’s sight? I know the answer, how about you (1 Pet. 4:11)?

(6) We limit our functions as a collectivity (that which we support from the treasury of the local church) to the things practiced by the first century churches when men guided by the Holy Spirit were among them (Phil. 4:9; 1 Cor. 4:16-17). What did the early churches of Christ do? (1) Preached and supported the preaching of Christ’s word to save sinners and edify the members of the body of Christ. (2) Relieved the physical needs of those among them who were unable to provide for themselves (1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 10:24-25; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Phil. 4:15-16). That’s it! So what if the most of the religious world about us, including many of our brethren, have opted for the “social gospel”? It is still not that which Christ authorized His churches to support (2 John 9-11)!

(7) As Christians and members of the church of our Lord as a result of being obedient to the faith (Acts 6:7; 2:22-28, 41, 47; 1 Cor. 12:13), we are conscience bound to reject Protestant denominationalism and Catholic tradition and teaching as a system promoting division contrary to the will of Christ and the lovely prayer He prayed in the shadow of the cross as it were (John 17:17, 20-2 1; 1 Cor. 1: 10- 12; Rom. 16:16-17; Eph. 5:11). Never mind the fact that such men as Billy Graham and others advocate the perpetuation of division based on different names, bodies and creeds saying for folks to “join the church of their choice” and practice in essence, the faith of their choice. The Bible still says, “. . . One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God. . . ” (Eph. 4:1-6). See Matthew 15:1-9, 13; Psalms 127: 1; Matthew 7:21-23; 2 Timothy 2:5; Revelation 22:18-19; Ephesians 5:11; 2 Timothy 4:1-8; Romans 16:16-18.

(8) As followers of Jesus as our Lord and the Christ of the Old Testament prophecy, we accept the New Testament as His will (John 12:48). We believe that this Testament along with the Old is inerrant and that the original manuscripts were verbally inspired, that is, the very words the Holy Spirit intended to be used were given to those who wrote the New Testament and they did not err in any matter (John 16:7-13; 1 Cor. 2:7-13; 2 Pet. 1:16-21; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:3). Now friends and brethren, the number of people who believe as we do about this matter isn’t the determining factor as to whether or not we are right in our beliefs. Nor is the matter of who it is that agrees with us. The determining factor is, is it the truth? I believe there is sufficient evidence internally and externally that it is. My faith rests on that fact.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, pp. 296-297
May 21, 1987