Truth Magazine

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: What is the main Point of Matthew 19.30 and 20:16 in light of the context? What is the application for us?

Reply: A parallel passage of Matthew 19:30 is Mark 10:31 (see also Lk. 18:28-30). Matthew’s account is: “But many shall be last that are first; and first that are last. ” Mark records it: “But many that are first shall be last; and the last first.” Jesus closed the parable of the laborers in the vineyard with the words: “So the last shall be first, and the first last” (20:16). This parable (Matt. 20:116) continues the thought of Matthew 19:30, because following this verse, Jesus begins in chapter 20, verse 1, with the word “for.” Commentators differ as to what is the main teaching of these verses. Our attention is therefore given to several considerations.

First, the Jews had been the chosen people of God – they were the first in the eyes of God. The Gentiles had not been in His favor; therefore, they were the last. But later, when the Jews rejected the gospel and the Gentiles accepted it, the situation was reversed. The Gentiles who had been last in God’s favor became first This is the interpretation given by several commentators.

Second, there is possibly a reference to the apostles themselves. Peter had responded to the teaching of Jesus about the rich by saying, “Lo, we have left all, and followed thee; what then shall we have?” (v. 27) We recall the disputes of these disciples as to who would have the highest position in the kingdom (18:1). Perhaps they were thinking that those who had first followed the Master (Peter, Andrew, James and John) should be given the honor of highest rank. With them, it would seem that the issue was the order of time. But God according to His greatness and prudence, will reward as He deems wise. Paul is a case in point. Paul entered the service later than the twelve apostles, but it cannot be presupposed that his reward will be less than theirs. In the parable that follows, regardless of when the workers entered the vineyard (whether it was the sixth, ninth or twelfth hour) the wages were the same. The amount had been agreed upon, “a shilling a day.” Jesus assured His disciples that they would be rewarded for their faithfulness. Addressing those who had followed Him (28a), He then projected to their future by assuring them, “in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (28b). This is the period between the day of Pentecost and the second coming of Christ. It is the present period, when men are regenerated by the new birth Qn. 3:5); it is the age when people become “new creatures” (2 Cor. 5:17) by “the washing of regeneration” (Tit. 3:5) which refers to baptism (Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3,4; etc.) These apostles are now judging members of the church (Spiritual Israel) by their inspired teaching — the word of God. Jesus promised them the richest blessing of all — eternal life (v. 29). Yet, those who entered His service later, would not receive any less reward. This seems to be the main point of the verses in the view of the context.

There is another suggested idea. Those that are first in the eyes of the world are last in the eyes of God, if they have not entered into His service. Those who are last are those who are in the kingdom but who are esteemed the lowest by those who are in the world. But these are first in the eyes of God.

Whichever view is the main point, the application for us is that we must enter into the kingdom of God at the first opportunity. In the parable given by our Lord, all the workers entered the vineyard at their first opportunity. We are by no way encouraged to procrastinate. To do so can be fatal to the soul. God will reward all who will enter into His family, the church, and serve Him faithfully. All will receive the same reward – an eternal home with God in heaven.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 20, p. 613
October 16, 1986

By Robert F. Turner

While working in a foreign land a preacher painted a sign in the native language and put it on their place of worship. Translated, the sign read, “The Church Meeting Here Was Established in Jerusalem, 33 A.D.” A few days later a native said, “Surely you do not expect me to believe that sign. I know who makes up this church, how it was started, and when.” So the preacher tried to explain this was but a congregation of the universal church established in Jerusalem. The task was hard enough, for he wished to avoid teaching a universal church made up of local churches. But he was told, “Then you have the wrong word on your sign. We have a separate word for ‘congregation. “‘ The story ends, with the preacher learning a lesson in language; but I wonder if we should not learn a lesson in “establishment” -and the nature of the local church.

We are trying to “Get To The Bottom Line” on the nature of the church. In a previous article we discussed the nature of the universal church (the saints), and we also showed what is obvious to unprejudiced readers; viz., saints are expected to form “teams” to carry out authorized collective obligations; and these “teams” are called “churches.” Most brethren believe the local churches are scriptural, but some may be confused about their establishment and their nature, as compared with the so-called ” universal” church. The concept of the Son of God as Priest, King, Advocate, etc., was established in the mind of God from eternity; but became functional after the cross – was preached as viable and operative the first Pentecost following the resurrection. When people submitted to this established “rule” they were the Lord’s flock, citizens, army, and church (“called-out” ones). That is how He “established His church” (in universal sense). How does He establish the local churches?

I believe the Lord established the Oaks-West church in Burnet, but He did so in much the same way He established marriage. He gave and sanctioned the concept, supplied instructions (via command, example, implication) as to its coming into being, and its function; all this in the New Testament. But brethren in Burnet established this particular “team,” just as Vivian and I established our particular marriage. The nature of the two “institutions” as respects their coming into being are very similar. They are the products of God’s plans, but await the exercise of our will and conduct. If we would have the blessings that accrue to each, we must form the unions each institution requires. This human instrumentality no more lessens the importance of the local church than of marriage. Nor is there an acceptable substitution for God’s plan in either.

The mechanics of a local church are simple. (1) It takes a plurality of saints to form a team. (2) Each saint must will to join the team, and be willing to accept the others; i.e., mutual agreement is necessary (study 1 Cor.5:1-7; 3 Jn.9-10). (3) They can not function as a team without agreeing to some common mind (direction and guidance); and overseers (elders, bishops, pastors) serve in this capacity (1 Thess.5:12; Heb. 13:17). In their absence, there still must be some way devised for reaching a common mind, or confusion will reign. (4) Team work necessitates a pooling of means and abilities; and in most cases this is done by a medium of exchange – money. This is the reason for the “treasury,” and it exists whether pooled money, canned goods, or efforts, (Treasury discussed in another article.)

The purpose of a local church is (1) mutual assistance in getting to heaven (“consider one another to provoke unto love and good works,” Heb.10:24); and, (2) assisting one another to meet physical needs, and to carry out the work of preaching to others (2 Cor.8; 11:8; Phil.4:15). This purpose is determined by noting things commanded of local churches, and taught by approved examples and necessary implications. When we look carefully and objectively at churches of the first century, the “team” work of saints is seen as a “tool” for carrying out the purpose of each individual saint. I must preach the gospel, regardless of what others do. I must help my brethren, regardless of others. But by pooling my means and abilities, as authorized to do by Scriptures, both I and others are benefitted. God has given us a “tool” for our work.

We should emphasize the local church as a “tool” for each of us in God’s service; rather than as some sacramental, ceremonial institution, after the order of the topology of the Old Testament institutions. Here is an essential difference in concepts concerning the local church. It is not counterpart to the tabernacle or temple; for that is in heaven (Heb.9:11-12, 24). We do not meet in a “sanctuary” (holy place) made with hands; but present our petitions in heaven itself – in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man” (Heb.8:2). N.T. church “service” is not “outward regulations for the body, that only hold till the period of the New Order” (Heb.9:6-10, Moffatt); for we are now in the “New Order.” Our worship is not validated, nor presented to God by or through official administrators (priest or “church”); for each of us is a priest (holy and royal) in the N.T. priesthood (1 Pet.2:5,9; Rom. 12:1). We need to think seriously on these things, and revise our “local church service” concepts, if necessary.

If man, not God, established a particular local church, is it (that local church) a perfect institution? No, it is not! Can it be rightly used as a standard for others? No, it can not (2 Cor. 10:12f)! Is it rightly a source of divine authority (i.e., are its judgments matters of faith)? No, they are not! The pattern determined by information in the Scriptures is perfect, and is bound upon us as a matter of faith; but we are fallible, and our compliance must never be regarded as a standard for others. Will God measure our compliance, and pass judgment upon our collective work? He will indeed, just as He does on all things commanded saints, distributively or collectively. Notice the warning to the church at Ephesus, regarding removal of her candlestick (Rev.2:1-5). Each saint is judged individually, with respect to individual and collective responsibilities (Rev.3:1-6). A weak church (about to have her candlestick removed?) may have “a few . . . worthy.”

It is hoped that these observations may help us see “the bottom line” concerning the local church and her nature. We can neither deny the institutional aspect of a local church, nor can we place our hope in that aspect. We must use what God has given us as a “tool” for service; without pinning our hopes on the “tool” itself. It is the Lord we must serve – first and always; and our loyalty to “the church” must exist only as loyalty to Christ makes that loyalty possible and necessary. Why should this be such a hard thing to understand? Why should we have to “throw out the baby with the wash water” of correction? An iconoclastic spirit – tear up and destroy – should give way to a teaching, encouraging, and exemplary spirit which shows others the better and right way of the Lord. May God help us to love Him first, and show that love by our concern for brethren who make up the blood bought “church.”

Guardian of Truth XXX: 20, pp. 615, 631
October 16, 1986

By Mike Willis

An English proverb says, “Honesty is the best policy.” Another says, “Honesty pays,” as one considers the long-lasting fruits of honesty in life. Another quipped, “Honesty pays, but it doesn’t seem to pay enough to suit a lot of people” (Kin Hubbard, The New Book of Unusual Quotations, p. 162b).

What is “honesty”? Webster defines the word as follows:

1. Originally, (a) honorable; held in respect; (b) respectable, creditable, commendable, seemly, etc.: a generalized epithet of commendation.

2. That will not lie, cheat, or steal; truthful; trustworthy.

3. (a) As showing fairness and sincerity; straightforward; free from deceit… (b) gained or earned by fair methods, not by cheating, lying, or stealing.

Honesty is a character trait which is repeatedly emphasized in the book of Proverbs.

Honesty Will Guide and Deliver You

The wise man wrote, “The integrity of the upright shall guide them . . . The righteous of the perfect shall direct his way” (Prov. 11:3,5). These verses indicate that integrity will direct and guide one in life. How does this occur? If a man will decide to only do what is right, to be honest and fair with his fellow man and before God, many decisions which face him in life will already be answered. Should anyone seek to persuade him to become involved in crooked business deals, he has no trouble making his decision. His decision to be honest guides him in that decision and directs his path. Hence, honesty will guide you.

Later the wise man added, “The righteousness of the upright shall deliver them” (Prov. 11:6). Here righteousness is said to deliver one from harm. There are many problems in life which come to those who are dishonest and crooked: some are arrested for shady business deals, some have conflict with their neighbors because of their lying and stealing, etc. Heartache comes from walking in the path of wickedness. The man who resolves to be honest is delivered from these pains and heartaches.

Honesty Is A Blessing Passed Down To One’s Children

A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children. . . (Prov. 13:22).

The just man walketh in his integrity: his children are blessed after him (Prov. 20:7).

The fate of all men is to pass into oblivion. Millions of people who once inhabited this earth have passed on and no one remembers their name. My fate will be to die and be forgotten by those who live after. About the most that one can hope for, from a strictly temporal point of view, is that his name will be remembered among the just (Prov. 10:7). When I am gone, may my name be remembered alongside that of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Paul, Peter, Mines, and John; let it not be mentioned alongside of Ahab, Jezebel, Judas, Adolf Hitler, and Jesse James.

I can pass down to my children a good name – a name synonymous with honesty, integrity, righteousness, holiness, etc. By living righteously, I can provide a good example for my children and grandchildren to emulate. I can guide the moral training of my children.

Areas In Which Dishonesty Is Common

1. Business. Business is renown for dishonest practices. “Buyer beware” warns of the danger of dishonest merchants. The proverbs say, “A false balance is abomination to the Lord” (Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:10). The balance was the means of weighing goods for buying and selling. By using false weights, a trader could cheat those from whom he bought and sold. We can be thankful that we live in a country where weights and measures are closely regulated by civil law to protect us from dishonesty in business.

Usury is another form of dishonesty in business condemned in Proverbs (28:8). Usury is charging excessive interest rates on money. The rich abused the poor, taking advantage of them, by charging excessive rates of interest on loans. Our government regulates the lending institutions to protect men from such abuses.

Get-rich-quick schemes have been a temptation to men of all ages. Men want to be rich without earning their money. In get-rich-quick schemes, the natural process of labor is circumvented and the desire to be rich causes one to compromise principles of honorable business. The quality of materials is reduced and descriptions of what the product can do are exaggerated. Fraud is committed. “He that maketh haste to be rich shall not be innocent . . . He that hasteth to be rich hath an evil eye” (Prov. 28:20,22).

Taking advantage of the poor is another form of dishonesty condemned in the Proverbs (cf. 22:16,22). When some see a man in extreme circumstances, they see his unfortunate condition as a means of making an easy dollar. Widows, orphans, and poor people are the victims of the wealthy.

One of the first lessons to learn about dishonesty in business is that it will bring unhappiness (Prov. 20:17). “Bread of deceit is sweet to a man; but afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel.” Though one might win a temporary advantage, soon his business tactics become known and men shun doing business with him. You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. The end result is that dishonesty hurts the man committing it.

The proverbs exalt the value of honesty in business when they teach that poverty with integrity is better than riches with dishonesty (Prov. 16:8; 19:22; 22:1; 28:6). Not everyone believes this. The man who submits his life to the direction of God’s word believes this and lives his life in compliance with the demands of honesty.

Some of the areas in which many are dishonest in business today include the following: misrepresenting the product they are selling (e.g., a person who rolls back the odometer on a car which he is selling); padding expense accounts, labor charges, or material costs; accepting kickbacks; paying bribes; refusing to pay one’s just bills (cf. Rom. 13:8).

As Christians, we must bend over backwards to be sure that we are honest in business. We need not only to obey the demands of the law of God, but also to provide things honest in the sight of all men (Rom. 12:17; 2 Cor. 8:21).

2. Speech. Our speech should manifest that we are honest. Some of the ways in which men show dishonesty in speech are: (a) Lying (Prov. 12:22); (b) Being two-faced (Prov. 10: 18; 23:6-8); (c) Bearing false witness (Prov. 14:5,25). A man’s word should be his bond.

3. Stealing. The Scriptures condemn stealing (Eph. 4:28 – “Let him that stole steal no more. . .”). One test of a man’s honesty is whether or not he will steal. His honesty is not demonstrated by the fact that he will not steal when someone is watching. “The thief who finds no opportunity to steal thinks himself an honest man” (Talmud). However, he is not an honest man; he simply has not had an opportunity to steal.

Our society is plagued with thieves. Some rob the neighborhood convenience store; some shoplift; some steal hubcaps, tires, etc. Among teenagers, cheating on tests is a common form of stealing. One person will steal the answers from another’s paper; others become accomplices in stealing by helping a friend steal answers. Some people tamper with cable television devices in order to receive pay channels without paying for them.

Another area in which dishonesty is rampant is stealing from the government on income tax returns. Some misrepresent their income; others misrepresent their deductions. In both ways, men steal from the government by failing to pay their legislated taxes.

Fruits of Dishonesty

Dishonesty brings its own reward. The law of retribution (“whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap”) cannot be escaped. Dishonesty will cause a man to have a bad reputation in the community in which he lives. His neighbors will not want to have anything to do with him and will not respect him.

Many times dishonesty will lead to violation of the civil law. In such cases, dishonesty can lead to fines and imprisonment (e.g. in stealing, fraud, etc.).

Whether or not one’s dishonesty is ever known by his friends or neighbors and whether or not one’s dishonesty brings civil fines and imprisonment, it will bring eternal damnation from the hands of a just God. Lying, stealing, and cheating are sins before God which will keep a person out of heaven and cause him to suffer the torments of hell.

Conclusion

“Honesty is the best policy.” When my life is over, may it be said of me, “Every man has his fault, and honesty is his” Burns wrote, “An honest man’s the noblest work of God” (The Cotter’s Saturday Night via The Pocket Book of Quotations, p. 137).

Guardian of Truth XXX: 20, pp. 610, 632-633
October 16, 1986

By Larry Ray Hafley

According to the Associated Press in an article entitled, “Falwell Gets Travel Advice,” “Former President Jimmy Carter said . . . that television evangelist Jerry Falwell, . . . ‘can go to hell'” (Peoria Journal Star, September 12, 1986, p. A2).

Really, Mr. President? And how do you propose he get there, assuming, of course, he wants to go? You see, both Carter and Falwell are Baptists and neither believes the other can “go to hell.” Baptist doctrine teaches “that a child of God can do anything he wants to and go to heaven anyhow” (Vernon L. Barr; Albert Garner). “If I killed my wife and mother and debauched a thousand women I couldn’t go to hell – in fact I couldn’t go to hell if I wanted to” (Bill Foster, The Weekly Worker, March 12, 1959).

That is potent stuff. Devout Baptists may recoil and be repulsed by its bluntness and by its logical consequences, but it fairly represents Baptist doctrine and is consistent with their belief that it is impossible for a child of God to go to Hell. So, how shall Falwell expedite Carter’s advice? Perhaps a Baptist could enlighten us.

It will do no good, however, to blast President Carter for his out burst. Even he cannot go to hell, as per Baptist theology. He can tell a fellow Baptist to do something he cannot do; namely, “go to hell,” but not even he, as a “born again believer,” can “go to hell” for his vulgarism and implied impeachment of Baptist doctrine.

All of the above concerns would be amusing if they were not so serious. Going to hell is not a joke (Heb. 10:31). It is an awesomely horrendous prospect. Numbers of people are going there (Matt. 7:13,14), and it will not be because of President Carter’s consignment (Matt. 10:28; Jas. 4:12).

Guardian of Truth XXX: 20, p. 614
October 16, 1986