Truth Magazine

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: Please explain 1 John 3:19-21.

Reply: The passage of Scripture under consideration (1 Jn. 3:19-21) reads: “Hereby shall we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our heart before him: because if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, we have boldness toward God. . .”

The first thing we need to notice is that the apostle is informing his readers that they should have assurance or boldness. This boldness is based upon doing the will of God – obeying His commandments. This fact is stated in the next verse (v. 22). Here John writes: “and whatsoever we ask we receive of him, because we keep his commandments and do the things that are pleasing in his sight.” We have assurance when we keep God’s commandments. We are not to suppose that God grants our every prayer request unconditionally. This is not what John is saying. What he is saying, is that the petitions which are granted to us are those which are in harmony with His will, and because we are keeping His commandments.

Verse 19 begins with the word “hereby,” i.e., in view of what has been written in verse 18. It reads: “My little children, let us not love in word, neither with the tongue; but in deed and truth.” Love is demonstrated, not by mere words, but by action. Jesus said to His disciples: “If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments” (Jn. 14:15). We must remember, then, that the boldness or assurance that is emphasized in these verses is dependent upon our keeping the commandments of God. Thereby we can know that we are of the truth. Jesus before Pilate said: “Every one that is of truth heareth my voice” (Jn. 18:37). Thus by our knowledge of the truth and by our practice of the truth, our hearts are assured. The word “assure” is from the Greek verb peitho which means “to persuade, i.e. to induce one by words to believe. . . to cause belief in a thing” (J.H. Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon, p. 497). The heart of one is assured or persuaded by the truth, producing a genuine love for God and others in word and deed.

In verse 20 the writer then says, “because if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.” When does our heart “condemn” us? It is when we have some doubt or uneasiness (due to our imperfections) that we are pleasing God. The honest heart is aware that we all sin. But keep in mind that John is addressing Christians, not depraved men whose hearts are hardened. Children of God, although having assurance, may sometimes or even often doubt that they are living up to the measure in their lives that God desires. But “God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things.” He knows us better than we know ourselves. He will rule upon all of our thoughts and conduct and He will judge us upon the basis of His standard of right and wrong. That standard is His word (Jn. 12:48; Acts 17:31). He is aware of all of our failures and short comings. He knows our spiritual state. He is a righteous judge and will do right (Gen. 18:25).

“Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, we have boldness toward God” (v. 21). We have boldness from God when we do His will, as we have stated. In addition, we have the approval of our own heart. Our heart, or conscience, sits as a judge or witness upon our moral actions. When our moral actions result from what God teaches us in His word, then God approves us and our heart also approves us. This gives us great boldness. When we as Christians realize that we have sinned, we are to repent and pray (Acts 8:22; 1 Jn. 1:9), knowing that “we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn. 2:1). We are thankful that God has provided us with these conditions. When we comply with them we can also be thankful that we can trust in His mercy and compassion to save us. This is “blessed assurance” about which we sing., It is the assurance Paul had after he had “fought the good fight, finished the course and kept the faith.” He expressed his assurance in the words: “henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day, and not to me only, but also to all them that have loved his appearing” (2 Tim. 4:8). Every child of God has such confidence when he does the will of his heavenly Father.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 5, p. 133
March 5, 1987

By Donald P. Ames

In our last article we discussed the misuse some make of Proverbs 23:13-14. We noted that God expects us to be fair; and to have love, mercy, and pity in dealing with our children. We further note that if we made more effort in instructive discipline, corrective discipline would not be as frequently required of us. Now, let us note some guidelines that can be helpful in applying discipline.

First of all, while spanking may be a scriptural method of discipline, it is not the only way to discipline (i.e.: it is not an exclusive method). Every child is different, and some may respond to a hard look or word of rebuke just as easily (just as we withdraw fellowship spiritually for church discipline – not just hit them over the head with a club). Some, having become used to constant discipline, do not pay any attention at all to it, but may respond quickly to a show of affection – or to the loss of TV for an evening or to “write 10 times. . . . ” Others can be motivated with special privileges (“Get his done for me, and you can go special this week end”), but one must beware that you do not get caught up in the trap of having to bribe to get anything done. Sometimes, a special hug and being told how much a good job done means does more than any other reward can do! God also motivates us with both the fear for not obeying and a response to the love He manifested to us too (Matt. 25:46; 1 Jn. 4:10-11).

When corrective discipline is required, where possible, it should be done immediately. This is important for several reasons: (1) To the child. If we merely threaten, then never do, a child soon assumes there will be no consequences (Eccl. 8: 11). Or, maybe they will conclude that they can talk their way out of the discipline if given enough time and get their own way regardless. Or they may decide that since they have it coming, why not get away with all they can in the meantime and make it “worthwhile.” (2) To the parent. This prevents you from allowing many little things to keep building up to the point you are pushed into over-reacting by compensating for “all those other things” when you finally do respond, and maybe punishing far more than the deed done deserves. It may also reduce the need for such when it is learned you mean what you say.

Punishment should be in proportion to the thing done. A lamp is a lamp is a lamp. But one broken because you tripped over a foot-stool or accidently bumped it while using the vacuum is not the same as one broken because you wouldn’t quit throwing the ball in the house. An egg broken is not parallel in punishment to a priceless vase. Make the punishment fair and in proportion to the problem at hand – not to all they have done in the last month. Also be sure the problem is that they are really bad and/or disobedient, and not that you are tired and/or have had a bad day at work.

Another point is that pre-planning our punishment can help us avoid “losing control.” Do not merely “react,” but properly weigh and evaluate what is a fair response. If we have pre-determined the punishment is “1 swat,” “3 swats,” or “6 swats,” and then anger begins building and we’d like to give another “39 swats,” quit where you decided in advance regardless. This will not only help you exercise self-control, but avoid getting “out of control.” It is also a good way to avoid over punishing. (“For not doing the dishes, you can’t go anywhere for a whole month.” Now, really?)

Do not make broad, unfair accusations that are not germane to the issue at hand (“You never do anything I tell you to do”). Nor should you, make unfair comparisons with other family members. (“Why can’t you show half the intelligence of your brother?”) Destroying one’s self respect and confidence – is another “no-no” (“You never could do anything right”). Not only is it usually untrue, unkind, and unfair; but it breeds resentment and rebellion – not the desired change. Treat them as you would like to be treated by your boss or companion (Matt. 7:12).

Do not go against your companion! Children quickly learn to play one parent against the other. Support your companion’s decision – and if there are differences, discuss them later in private. If a child learns he can play one parent against the other, the weaker one will become “fair game” for bargaining against the other and a constant effort to wear down to get what they want (and probably do not deserve, if being corrected).

Lastly, always let it be known you still love them, and why they have to be corrected. “It hurts me more than it does you” is often true, and is a statement only a parent can appreciate. But, if we fail to manifest that love, and show only anger and/or carry a grudge for a week, the child responds accordingly. A poor example has been set before him, and barriers erected instead of torn down. Be ready to forgive later when they come around – just as God forgives us (Psa. 130:3; Ezek. 33:11; 1 Jn. 1:9).

May these random thoughts help all of us be better parents in fulfilling the role God gave us. They have helped me in getting them together, and if they have profited you half as much, the effort has been indeed worthwhile.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 4, p. 116
February 19, 1987

By Robert F. Turner

Every conscientious gospel preacher with some years of experience has faced the troubling decision about very young people who ask to be baptized. We are happy to see them walk resolutely down the aisle; our hearts are warmed by their innocent confidence; we feel a tie to our own childhood as we put our arms around them and hear them express their desire to become a Christian. But as we consider their tender years we wonder if they are subject to and capable of understanding and making this momentous decision.

We know the error of infant baptism. “Go teach all nations, baptizing them. . .,” i.e., the “taught” (Matt. 28:19). Baptism is not a ritual that, of itself, removes sins or puts one into Christ. It is an obedience of faith, deliberately chosen as a result of learning our lost condition, and submitting our will to the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. “Repent, and be baptized. . . ” is commanded of sinners (Acts 2:38). It calls upon them to regret and truly turn from their past ways, to embrace life as “new creatures.” I recall trying to talk to a very young girl who had requested baptism, and being repeatedly interrupted by the girl’s mother who had accompanied her to the front. When I asked the young child if she felt she had sins that needed to be forgiven, the mother was outraged. “Sins?” she blurted. “Why, she is much to young to have sins, and you should know that.” I suspected it, hence the questions. But neither of us believed in inherited sin, so, why should she be baptized?

We can not know the heart or the initial accountability of another. We do not “administer” baptism by some priestly authority, so there is no “official” decision to be made. It is probably the wiser course to assist all who come of their own will, requesting baptism; and this is my usual practice. But there are times when one can not help but wonder if we practice infant baptism. Those “brought up in the church” may learn by rote and example certain conducts, including baptism, which they do not understand and therefore can not “obey from the heart.” And many of us have seen peer pressure bring to the baptistry young children, who later will acknowledge they “did it because Jane, or Bob, did it.” All of us better understand the gospel as. we grow in grace and knowledge; but does this warrant “infant membership” with “confirmation” years later?

Make no hasty answer, for there is yet another side to the story. I have also seen the super cautious approach cause tender young hearts to despair. Their request may be an early indication of maturing, a beginning of the individuality and independence we wish to encourage. We must be careful lest we squelch the very spirit on which we must build full grown Christian character. Furthermore, the tender heart which is easily impressed with right and wrong, responds readily to ideals. That heart which is so very impressionable now, will one day be burdened by the crass materialism all about us. Do not expect the public schools, or the streets, to guide this plastic mind in God’s direction. The child we persuade to “wait,” will later approach the gospel with a more calloused heart, and may never come.

Amid the many unanswered problems of our subject are some clear lessons. There is room for improvement in our teaching, and for more careful application of the gospel to our hearers. Little children may learn “believe, repent, confess, be baptized” by rote, and not grasp the more basic concept of truth in the Lord, or the real meaning of obedience. But is not this also true of adults who have little or no religious background, and who are being introduced to Bible teaching? In our haste to “close the deal” may we not practice “infant” baptism on them also. Our film strip home studies, in the hands of inexperienced teachers, may stir emotions and push for baptism before the subject is truly penitent and the “old man” ready for burial (Rom. 6:6-11). We must somehow dig below the surface and produce genuine dedication to Christ as Lord.

We have no quarrel with “make it simple”; the big question is, make what simple? We must stress the real meaning of sin, of Christ as Savior, and of faith in Him. Catholicism gave the “church” the role of Savior; and denominations gave it the role of Social Club. Both these roles must be negated and our hearers made to understand that Christians are a, “called out” people, wholly given to the worship and service of their king in every aspect of their life. It will take straight intelligent preaching to make the gospel understood, and applicable to proper subjects of its message.

Nor do we advocate catechism or specific indoctrination courses prior to baptisms. As previously stated, all come to Christ as babes in some sense, and are expected to grow thereafter. Rather, we would emphasize that in this day “Christianity” and “church” have been so perverted in the public mind we may be deceiving ourselves when we report “converted to Christ.” We might give a more honest report by including a section in our Directory headed, “Infant Membership.”

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 5, p. 135
March 5, 1987

By Frank Jamerson

Recently I visited a brother who had decided that he could not worship with a congregation because preachers misunderstood the Bible and would not agree with his ideas. In fact, he had decided that it was wrong to have preachers at all! He asked me if I was a preacher “sent” by God like the ones mentioned in Romans 10. I told him that I was not, because that is talking about the original messengers who were moved by the Spirit to reveal God’s message. I do not know what he expected me to say, but he had already made up his mind that since we do not have Spirit-guided men today we should not have preachers.

I thought that it would be good to get him with brother Charles Holt and the other preachers who oppose elders being appointed in churches and maybe they could get rid of the preachers as well as the elders, and all our problems would be solved! It would be interesting to hear them preach that we should not preach! (The man I visited did most of the “preaching” while I was there!) This doctrine would fit well with the doctrine that says elders should not oversee treasuries, so we will establish a treasury to be overseen by preachers to teach that it is wrong to have treasuries!

But, what about preachers? Does it follow that since the word is used to refer to those who revealed the message that we should not have preachers today? When Jesus commissioned the apostles to go into all the world, He said, “teach,” “baptize,” and “teach them” to do likewise (Matt. 28:18-20). After the church was established, and persecution arose, those who were scattered “went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). All these disciples did not have to be endowed with miraculous gifts to “teach” what they knew. Paul wrote the Corinthians that “through the foolishness of the message preached” (1 Cor. 1:21), those who believed could be saved. Does one have to be “moved by the Spirit” in order to preach this message? If so, then miraculous gifts must continue, or else the preaching of the gospel must cease!

Every Christian has a responsibility to teach, as he has ability and opportunity. Those who spend their time in doing this may scripturally be supported to do this work. “Even so did the Lord ordain that they that proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:14). Paul “made tents” on occasions (Acts 18:1-3), and on other occasions received “wages” from churches (2 Cor. 11:8).

But, why did “no preachers” remind me of “no elders”? Simply because it involves the same kind of perverting the Scripture. It is true that we do not have the same kind of “preachers” that Romans 10 discusses, but that does not prove that it is wrong for men to preach and even be supported for doing so. Likewise, it is true that the word “elder” sometimes refers to age and may refer to women as well as men. When Paul said, “Do not sharply rebuke an older man, but rather appeal to him as a father; the younger men as brothers, the older women as mothers, and the younger women as sisters, in all purity” (1 Tim. 5:1,2 NASV), he was speaking of age. Does this prove that there is no such thing in the Bible as men who meet certain qualifications being appointed as overseers in churches? Certainly not!

Back in 1970, I asked brother Holt if women could be bishops in the church, and he answered “yes.” His contention was, and still is, that there is no such thing as a special work of “elders” who meet God-given qualifications. To him, and others who have accepted this view, “elder” simply refers to age and includes women as well as men who “grow into” the leadership by spiritual maturity. The qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 are completely irrelevant. How could a woman be the “husband of one wife”? Why say that a bishop must not be a “novice” (new convert), if he is simply an older Christian who has grown into leadership? How could he be both a “novice” and seasoned by age at the same time? The Bible teaches that men who meet the qualifications of the Spirit are to be appointed in “every church” (Acts 14:23; Tit. 1:5). A man or woman may be “elderly” without being appointed as a bishop in the church, just as a person may be a preacher of the word without being the kind mentioned in Romans 10.

It seems that when preachers do not like the decisions of elders or find some who are unqualified and dictatorial, they decide that the abuse justifies rejection of the system. Maybe elders should get together and start a paper “examining” preachers. They could contend that modern-day preachers do not fit the description of Romans 10, and could probably come up with a few dictatorial and unreasonable men who use their “office” (work) to get their way. They might even find a few who are hypocrites. Surely this would be grounds to reject the whole system! But, on second thought, if these elders began preaching that we cannot have preachers, some would no doubt see the inconsistency of it!

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 4, p. 105
February 19, 1987