Truth Magazine

By Norman Midgette

Accepting the responsibility to teach in a Bible Class is a very important and serious matter. One of the gifts Christ gave to the church along with apostles, prophets, evangelists and elders was “teachers” (Eph. 4:11). The gravity with which this duty should be faced is further emphasized in James 3:1. “Be not many of you teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive heavier judgment.”

There are two things that make this work so important. One is the nature of the book you are teaching. It is the only divine book in the world. Some of the words, though written in the book by man, were first written by the finger of God (Ex. 31:18; Dan. 5:5-28). All of it is inspired or “God breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). Peter said men spoke as they were “borne along by the ‘Holy Spirit'” (2 Pet. 1:21). When you hold in your hand before a class of students the Bible, you are holding the book God has revealed, protected, preserved and made available to us in our own language through His providence and the one, when obeyed, which will save us (Jas. 1:21). It is the last book each of your students will face and at that time the destiny of their souls will be determined by its content (Jn. 12:48). Are you a teacher of this book? If so, teach it with preparation, seriousness, and make sure what you are teaching from it is the Truth. A Bible classroom is no place for an unfaithful person as a teacher nor the place for an unprepared person as a teacher. Being “faithful” and “able” were the two qualities Paul told Timothy to look for in those who would teach others (2 Tim. 2:2).The other factor making teaching the Bible so important is the nature of the ones you are teaching. Their spirits and souls are as eternal as the Book from which you are teaching them. They will live forever and what you are teaching them has to do with doing that in the presence of God. You are not teaching them how to fix a car, teach history in school, punch data into a computer, fly an airplane or even fly into outer space. You are teaching them how to go much farther than that. And when they get there they are not there for a week or two but forever. Each student brings you a soul to instruct and help prepare for eternity. What an opportunity this is and what a responsibility!

A good teacher keeps his or her eye on eternity.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, p. 648
November 6, 1986

By Earl Kimbrough

After Paul and Barnabas established churches in Southern Galatia, they appointed elders in every church” (Acts 14:23). This and all other New Testament references to elders or bishops show their importance in the development and function of local churches. Faithful elders are worthy of honor (1 Tim. 5:17) and should be esteemed “very highly in love for their work’s sake” (1 Thess. 5:12,13). In view of this, it is distressing to hear men belittle the eldership almost as if it were a device of Satan foisted on the churches to hinder progress and hogtie preachers.

The fact that some elders abuse their oversight does not justify rejecting elders as an established order among God’s people. There may be times when it is best for a church to delay the appointment of elders, but to argue that as a rule a church is better off without elders is to argue against the will of God. Nor is there much improvement in attitude when brethren say we should have elders, but interpret the qualifications so as to prevent it. A preacher, who labored fifty years where churches under his influence had no elders, told me he had been falsely accused of not believing in elders. Then he said, “I just never have seen anybody qualified.” What’s the difference? A man may as well not believe in elders as to think God requires the impossible.

One of the errors prominently featured in The Examiner, official voice of the Truth and Freedom Ministry, Inc. of Chattanooga, Tennessee, concerns the work of elders. Among other things, Charles A. Holt, the editor, claims that elders are merely the older man in the church who become elders by seniority, not by appointment, and that the eldership carries no authority. Some of his teaching is in reply to the questions: “Do you believe in elders? What does the word ‘elder’ mean? Who is an elder? How are elders made?” Here are some responses.

“I Believe In Elders”

“Yes definitely, I believe in elders and always have. . . . I am an elder! I am a ‘Senior Citizen.’ The word ‘elder’ simply means ‘older’ or ‘elder . . . (The Examiner, Vol. 1, p. 11).

Brother Holt believes in elders about like a Methodist preacher believes in baptism. The Methodist might with equal sincerity say: “Yes, definitely, I believe in baptism and always have. . . . I am a baptizer! I am a sprinkler.” Both shift gears on the key words. The Methodist sees no difference between baptism and sprinkling. Brother Holt sees no difference between an elder and a senior citizen. But an “elder” of the church is not necessarily a “Senior Citizen.” The word “elder” has both a general and a special use, which is determined by the context.

Elder (Presbuteros) generally refers to age, sometimes meaning the older or oldest of two or more persons (Luke 15:25; John 8:9), and sometimes signifies those advanced in years (Acts 2:17). But the word also means: “of rank or positions of responsibility . . . in the Christian churches, those who, being raised up and qualified by the Holy Spirit, were appointed to have the spiritual care of, and to exercise oversight over, the churches” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary). In places where the word refers to overseers in the church, it signifies men “of rank or positions of responsibility.” Of course, “The term ‘elder’ indicates the mature spiritual experience and understanding of those so described” (Vine). But just being an older man does not carry such a meaning.

Elders Not Made By Appointment

“You do not, cannot, make someone an ‘elder’ by ordination or appointment” (The Examiner, Vol. 2, p. 11).

Here again is a misuse of the word “elder.” Certainly you cannot make one a “senior citizen” by appointment (although many good elders might agree that the work does age a person). But you can make one a person of rank or place him in a position of responsibility by appointment. This is what Paul and Barnabas did in Southern Galatia: they “appointed elders in every church” (Acts 14:23). This is why Titus remained in Crete: to “appoint elders in every city” (Titus 1:5). Titus could not appoint elders before they were qualified to be elders (Titus 1:5-9), but he could, and apparently did, appoint elders, contrary to the claims of The Examiner.

Men Are Elders Before Their Appointment “Men who are already elders were appointed, or placed, or arranged for doing the work of a bishop, shepherd, or pastor . . . . Any and all who are elders (older, mature, experienced) had better be up and about this business” (The Examiner, Vol. 2, p. 12).

The New Testament does not teach that elders were appointed “bishops,” but that qualified men were “appointed elders.” They were appointed elders at the same time they were made bishops by the Holy Spirit. The word , ‘elder” does not necessarily convey the idea of old age, maturity, or experience. The elder brother of the Prodigal Son may have been a young man and his conduct indicates that he lacked maturity. It is only in its special use that the word denotes maturity and experience. But age per se is not a requirement for an elder of the church, although experience and maturity are (Titus 1:5-9). A man may acquire all the qualifications for the eldership to a superlative degree without being a “senior citizen” or an “old man.”

The Examiner seems to encourage the older people in the church to just rise up and assume the oversight. This, of course, would necessarily preclude any appointment to the work. Notice that the editor gives no sexual limitation to the phrase, “Any and all who are elders. ” This might be insignificant were it not for other statements. He also says: “In the NT (New Testament) we read of elder or older men; and of elder or older women (Titus 2). The word means the same in both instances” (Vol. 2, p. 11). Then he adds: “even elder or senior women have been appointed or ordained by God . . . for certain kinds of service. Does this make them ‘church officers’? . . . The apostle appointed or ordained elder women to certain responsibilities just exactly like he did elder men (Acts 14:23; 20:20)” (Ibid).

Brother Holt does not say older women should join the older men in being “up and about this business” of shepherding the congregation, but on the basis of his reasoning, he could hardly object to women elders in the church. But neither “the older men” nor “the older women” in Titus 2 were appointed elders. The apostle simply instructs the older men and women to conduct themselves in a manner that conforms to sound teaching (Titus 2:1-5). The older women were taught to perform a specific service (to teach the younger women). They were not appointed to a place of rank or responsibility over the flock of God, and could not be (cf. 1 Tim. 2:12).

Elders Have No Authority in the Church

“The NT (New Testament) does not teach that elders had ‘authority,’ especially of the kind Jesus claimed for Himself in Matthew 28:18” (Ibid., p. 10).

Anyone who teaches that elders have the kind of authority Christ has, or that the apostles and other inspired men had, does not speak “as the oracles of God.” But elders do have authority from Christ to do what they are appointed to do. They have authority to oversee and shepherd the flock of God among them (cf. Acts 10:28; 1 Pet. 5:2; 1 Tim. 3:4,5; 5:17). Whatever this involves, when it is done according to the teaching of the Scriptures, those under the elders’ oversight are taught to obey and submit to them (Heb. 13:17). These instructions cannot be ignored without violating the teaching of Christ (cf. 2 John 9,10).

Furthermore, the authority of elders takes into account their fallibility and imperfection. They have no right to make laws for the church (Jas. 4:12), nor to modify Christ’s word or act as His “official” interpreters. Their decisions are not written on tables of stone. Their oversight is somewhat like that of a husband to his wife (Eph. 5:23-25). No Christian is obligated to obey elders who act contrary to God’s will, or when they operate outside the range of their authority (cf. Acts 5:29). Nor are Christians required to submit to elders who disregard their spiritual welfare (cf. Acts 20:28; Rom. 14:12), or who run roughshod over their conscience (1 Cor. 8:12). In emphasizing the authority of elders, we may fail to stress with equal vigor the limitations, we must be careful not to deny them the authority they have from the Lord to do what they are appointed to do.

The Examiner has not cornered the market on perversions concerning elders. Some of old have held erroneous views regarding certain aspects of the office, and there have been enough abusive elders to make brethren justifiably wary and cautious in choosing men for the work. But The Examiner makes a frontal attack on the whole concept of the eldership as set forth in the New Testament. This is why its teaching is more especially dangerous.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, pp. 656-657
November 6, 1986

By Lewis Willis

Some time ago I saw an interesting article by the venerable A.C. Grider. He was voicing his personal indignation at the thoughtless actions of some people. The careless attitudes of people that cause them to litter public streets, private lawns and church grounds with beer cans was cited. Also, the unconcerned practice of blowing smoke from cigarettes all over the place in restaurants, spoiling the taste of food and stinking up the clothes of non-smokers, was a matter of irritation to him. Well, I have a personal gripe that I wish to air.

To say that we are living in a commercialized society is an understatement. There is nothing that can stand in the way of our search for new ways of making money. The memory of no one is honored or sacred enough to prevent our use of his memory in an effort to sell our products. It would seem that men of distinction would be given more reverence or respect than is being given today by advertising agencies who promote the sale of goods.

Abraham Lincoln

Mr. Lincoln was the 16tb President of the United States. He stands in world history as one of the greatest men who ever lived. He took office on March 4, 186 1, and served until his assassination on April 14, 1865. He held the reigns of state through one of the most turbulent periods in the history of our country, the years of the Civil War. His great physical stature, his honesty and his oratory, are some distinctive characteristics that have earned for him the respect and affection of millions of people since his time. So, how is 11nory honored in 1986? We have a great stock reduction sale and call it a Lincoln’s Day Celebration Sale! Now, that is honor, friend!

George Washington

The first President of our nation is noted for his stable and sound judgment during the formative years of our union. Like Lincoln, he is noted for his honesty because of an incident regarding his childhood cutting down his father’s cherry tree. On February 22, we honor the date of his birth with cherry pie – and the inevitable Washington’s Birthday Clearance Sale! Ladies, come right in and let us honor our first President and you can buy wash clothes at our special reduced priced!

Jesus Christ

The absurdity comes when we contemplate the person of the Son of God. Here we are at our best. He died on a cruel cross to save a lost world from the doom of Hell. He endured the agony of Calvary and its humiliation, not for anything that He did, but for the sins of the creature we call “man.” Such an noble act should certainly be given a distinguished place in our lives. We have been told by modern religion that Easter is the time to celebrate this momentous event. So, we have an Easter Clearance Sale that just about tops them all! “Come right on in, lady, and I’ll sell you the prettiest Spring coat (from our discontinued line of goodies that would not sell last year) you can find at this price. Bring your husband along. We have s ne swell s in underwear, insulated or regular, that you won’t want to miss.” We are trying to celebrate this happy and joyous occasion in the best way we know — making money as fast as we can!

Kennedy And Others

One is made to wonder when the advertisers will decide it would be acceptable to have a stock reduction sale in honor of the assassination of John F. Kennedy..” This could really be a great occasion. The newspaper ads could be more in keeping with our time. It would not be necessary to use some artist’s drawing of his likeness. Perhaps we could find a picture of Mr. Kennedy, dying in the car in Dallas. That would really be effective! People would surely flock to such a sale!

Or, we might be able to conduct a sale celebrating the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Possibly one could be held to celebrate the killing of the 50,000th American boy in Vietnam. How about a sale celebrating the death of the 270 plus people who were killed in the downing of the Korean jetliner? These advertising men and their bosses, the store owners, are really patriotic and compassionate!

Conclusion

Talk about values – we have certainly developed some lovely ones, haven’t we? One wonders if the Apostle, when he said, “the love of money is the root of all evil,” realized how true his words were (1 Tim. 6:10). Could he have anticipated the low, mercenary outlook men would have in 1986?

And, what about you and me? Well, we contribute to this shameful situation because we can hardly wait for these great sales to get here. Then we flock to the stores and stock up on all the items that would not sell at regular price. The store owners make money at the expense of the memory of great men and events — we just save money! Money, money, money – our god!

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, p. 655
November 6, 1986

By Keith Pruitt

In a recent issue of Guardian of Truth, brother Weldon Warnock wrote answering a question raised regarding congregational and group singing at funerals and in worship assemblies. While the thrust of this review is toward collective worship when the church comes together, a lack of information herein concerning funerals and the like should not be taken as a dodge.

First, brother Warnock states that these things are according to his judgment. I can appreciate that as I have great respect for this good brother. But I must disagree strongly with his approach to the question and to certain particulars of his exegesis of 1 Corinthians 14:26.

Brother Warnock fills his article full of quotes of various scholarly ones in an attempt to cite approval of his unorthodox position. The quotes could probably have been multiplied many times. Denominational writers could be easily found in agreement since a chorus and quartets have long been the fashion among them. But would that really prove anything to the Bible student interested in truth? Even one of the sources cited was very telling. “As to the persons concerned in singing, sometimes a single person sang alone, but the most ancient and general practice of the church was for the whole assembly to unite with one heart and voice in celebrating the praises of God” (Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 8, p. 738). Obviously this is the most ancient custom, for congregational singing was that required of God (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). “But how about 1 Corinthians 14:26?” some ask.

Remember the context must determine our understanding. The context is clearly that of order in the assembly in view of spiritual gifts. This is clear as the rest of the verse mentions tongues, interpretation and revelation. It surely seems plausible that the Spirit inspired some to sing spiritually given psalms before the congregation. These, therefore, are regulated so as to keep order in the assembly. (See Barnes’ Notes, 1 Corinthians, Heritage Edition, pp. 271-272.)

In regards to Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, it is obvious from the structure of the statements (commands) that all are to be engaged in the commanded activity: “Yourselves” and “one another” from heautou suggests a reciprocal action done simultaneously. As one sings he is edifying another and being edified by the other. That the verb is active and not passive suggests a congregational activity in which all are engaged. Thee is little room for solos, a chorus, quartets, etc., to be found in these commands. And if they were included, they would be necessary, as these verses are commands.

Perhaps the thing that ate at me the most was brother Warnock’s refusal to accept his own answer. He states, basically, that (1) it is right to do it at funerals, therefore, (2) it must be right to do so in church worship periods, but (3) we shouldn’t do it in church worship periods because it might be done for show (the wrong reason, in other words), however, (4) one can go ahead and do it at funerals (even though it might be done for the wrong reason). Surely, our good brother has given little thought to his reasoning.

Brother, do a preachers preach for the right reason? Are there any that put on a show? You better believe it! So we shouldn’t allow preaching except at funerals. Is that our conclusion? Brother Warnock, your judgment may allow quartets on Sunday morning but your refusal to accept the usage of them surely says something about your judgment. I am as convinced today as ever that God’s word commands congregational singing in the public worship periods. Perhaps, brother Warnock, the problem is in the comparison of a funeral to a public worship period.

But may I also enquire as to where we shall stop? We get us a chorus (scriptural according to brother Warnock); we put them up front to keep it orderly. Then we put robes on them to keep them decent and to allow visitors to know why they are up front. And just like that you have duplicated every denominational chorus in the land. Brother Warnock says just don’t use them. But why not, if they are scriptural? Brother Warnock, may we use a chorus of women or a lady soloist?

Let us not grow soft on these issues. There are valid reasons why we have condemned solos and quartets. Let us continue to give a thus saith the Lord.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 21, p. 650
November 6, 1986