Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

I saw an advertisement from TV Guide that an upcoming article will have as its subject, the influence of television on America’s children. I have not read the article so I have no idea what will be said. However, I frequently think of the influence television has on our children and I become alarmed because of it. I wonder sometimes if parents are as alert to the influence and danger of TV as they ought to be. If your home is typical, your children spend many hours each week in front of the set. What are they seeing there? How will it affect their thinking now and in the future? Will they be able to distinguish between right and wrong? Will they elect to believe the message of television, or the message that you’re presenting to them from the Bible? What is television’s influence on your child?

1. Money is one of the prominent messages of TV. It seems to matter very little how you get it – just get it! The glamorous life of those with money is extolled. The financial condition of all others is portrayed as undesirable. The message to our children is “get money.”

2. Sex is the beginning, middle and the end of everything on most programs our children watch. Almost every product advertised is presented with a sexual overtone. The beautiful, handsome, healthy, successful and popular use the product being advertised. The implication is you are a “nerd” if you don’t use the product. Additionally, fornication, adultery and homosexuality are not only depicted, but they are presented as an acceptable lifestyle. Those who would frown upon these forms of sin are out-of-step with reality.

3. Violence is the only way to get anything worthwhile done if you follow the thinking and action of television’s heroes and heroines. It would be virtually impossible for a youngster to watch a night of television without seeing murder, war, rape, car crashes and a brutal fist fight. And, these things are shown as commonplace.

4. Drugs, alcohol, smoking and profanity are standard fare on most programs. Our young men and women learn all kinds of wonderful things from television. If you’re going to be “in,” young people of the country are lead to believe that these things must be a part of their lives. When a three or four year old spouts off some of this filth, his parents find it “cute.” But when he or she spouts it at age 15, those same parents are “alarmed.” We’d better start thinking!

5. Religion is ridiculed on a consistent basis. True, the telecasts of religious organizations “invite” such ridicule. However, the role of TV’s producers seems to be to portray all religion in as ridiculous a light as possible. Almost every time a person is shown who has religious convictions, that person is represented as one so out of step with the times, or so fanatical that no one in his right mind would consider his lifestyle desirable. And, in TV plots, every preacher is shown as a “fool.” This is what your child is lead to believe.

6. Marriage, as God ordained it, is portrayed as “silly.” No one who is “with it” believes in one man one wife. Marriage is shown as that brief time of deception and fighting between divorces. Series stars change marriage partners more often than you change your dinner menu. The home is shown as a battleground, between husband and wife, or, parents and children. Until The Cosby Show, one would watch a lot of TV before seeing family life presented decently.

I clipped the following illustration on what TV is doing to our children:

I remember as a kid hearing gospel preachers warn of the destructive influence of movies and television. TV, in those days, was a novelty. So much of what they had to say was spoken about movies. Anyway, they talked about how movies would ultimately corrupt whole generations of people. And, the movies they talked about are the “golden oldies” which are such an exception in today’s TV fare. Those movies molded the thinking of people and prepared them to accept the filth and garbage presented today. If those old preachers could speak, they might be disposed to say, “I told you so.” I also remember how those preachers were laughed at and ridiculed when they preached those sermons about the evils of movies. It would be interesting to know what some of those “laughing” parents think today when they scan the columns of TV Guide, looking for decent programs to watch. Since I am seeking to say the same thing those old timers used to say, go ahead and laugh at this point – then, think again about the message of this article.

There is an awful lot about television which I do not understand. The entire process of telecasting something which I can receive in my home miles away is beyond me. One think I know, the “off” button is the greatest invention on a TV set. It needs to be used often!

Guardian of Truth XXX: 15, p. 461
August 7, 1986

Greetings in the name of Jesus,

I would like, through this letter, to tell you why I can no longer serve as the Evangelist for the Goodlettsville Christian Church. I am leaving with no animosity toward anyone. I leave with love and care for each soul at the Goodlettsville Christian Church. The door of friendship stands open. We will not close that door to anyone.

(1) I cannot accept the instruments as a part of the worship service (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; Matt. 26:30; Mk. 14:26; Acts 16:25; Rom. 15:9; 1 Cor. 14:15; Heb. 2:12 and James 5:13).

(2) I cannot accept the “newspaper collection drive” and “aluminum can collection drive” as part of supporting the cause of Christ (1 Cor. 16:1-2; 2 Cor. 8,9; Matt. 21:12-13; Mark 11:15).

(3) I cannot accept the “candy sales” of the youth for their projects as part of supporting the cause of Christ (1 Cor. 16:1-2; Matt. 21:12-13; Mk. 11:15; 2 Cor. 8,9).

(4) I cannot accept as a part of the cause of Christ an entertainment project, such as the youth hour and talent show, which takes away from the preaching and teaching of the Gospel for youth project discussions and play/talent show rehearsals, etc. The main point of the Lord’s Church is the edification of the members through the preaching and teaching of the Gospel of Christ. Entertainment does not meet that which is taught through the authority of God’s Word (1 Cor. 14:40; Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 11:34).

(5) I cannot accept the ever widening authoritative role of the women at the Goodlettsville Christian Church (1 Cor. 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:11-12).

(6) I cannot accept the use of the general funds to provide the finances for a bus used to bring in children enticed with treats and entertainment. If carnal attractions are used to bring in people, then only carnal people will be brought in (Rom. 1:16; Matt. 28:19-20; Rom. 14:17).

(7) I cannot accept “special day” observances on the Lord’s Day in the Lord’s House (Heb. 10:25; Rev. 1:10; Acts 20:7; Gal. 4:10-11). The Lord’s Day is a day of worship, not fun, food and frolic. What we do within the areas of worship has been laid down for us within Scripture.

(8) I cannot accept “sponsoring institutions” and “institutions” financed from the general fund. The church has authority only to spend its monies on (a) preaching the Gospel to the lost, (b) teaching and edifying itself, and (c) limited benevolent work (Eph. 4:12).

(9) I firmly believe in 1 Timothy 3:7 and Titus 1:5-9 for the qualifications of Elders. These are the qualifications of an Elder and each qualification stands by itself. Each now serving Elder must continue to meet such qualifications.

(10) I firmly believe in 1 Timothy 3:8-13 for the qualifications of Deacons. These are the qualifications of a Deacon and each qualification stands by itself. Each now serving Deacon must continue to meet such qualifications.

(11) I firmly believe that the Lord’s supper is an integral part of the worship service at the assembly of believers. It is not to be taken outside that realm by those who absent themselves from the worship service and then choose to partake at a more convenient time for themselves (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:17-20).

(12) I firmly believe that the Elders of a local congregation are the overseers of the congregation. They are not to be out-voted by Deacons nor are they to be answerable to Deacons. Deacons are answerable to Elders. There is no authority for voting on anything in the Lord’s church. Elders are responsible to right anything wrong within the Lord’s church as soon as possible within the time frame as set by the Lord, not the time frame as set by man. The Church is a monarchy, not a democracy (Matt. 16:18-19; Acts 20:28; Heb. 13:17; 1 Pet. 5:14).

My friends, because of the twelve reasons listed, I can no longer worship with or minister to the Goodlettsville Christian Church. Such worship would be a violation of my personal religious convictions.

Sincerely,

Nelson J. Greene, Jr.

Gospel Preacher

Nelson Greene’s Letter To Lakeview Church of Christ

Hendersonville, TN

In January of 1975, after viewing the “Jule Miller Film Strip Series” and extensively studying the biblical word “baptism” at the library of Roanoke Bible College, I was truly convinced that I was a sinner and needed a Savior. I heard, I believed, I repented, I confessed and immersed into His Body for the remission of my sins. I was baptized into Christ at the Elizabeth City (NC) church of Christ (group using instruments). Three days later, I entered Roanoke Bible College. My wife Sue had the privilege of being baptized many years before in Nashville, Ohio. This, I thought, ended years of search for the truth of God. This search really began as an altar boy through my years of being a Catholic priest to my move to Goodlettsville to serve as Evangelist for the Goodlettsville Christian Church.

I continued to study God’s Word and became convinced that the Christian Church had many years before lost its First Love. In my search of Scriptures I investigated that institutional church of Christ and was still convinced that they were not the New Testament Church. It was not until I saw the sign at the Lakeview church of Christ (No Kitchens . . .) that caused me to wonder if indeed there was in actual existence the Lord’s church in practice and worship. I decided to investigate this group of people. On Monday, April 21st, after I decided that I could no longer stay and accept the human inventions that characterized the Christian Church, I stopped and talked with Jr. Bronger for the first time; and I was impressed with his answers to my questions (book, chapter and verse). I attended two gospel meetings at his invitation. On Tuesday, I had a lengthy discussion with Jr. and David Lanius at the Bronger’s. After the discussion and upon arriving home I told my wife Sue that “we’ve got to talk,” at which time my wife revealed that she had been expecting me to take a stand against these unscriptural innovations. To my pleasant surprise she stated that she too felt they were wrong.

I informed the Elders of the Goodlettsville Christian Church on April 27th of my decision; and announced to the entire congregation on May 4th my decision. Today we’re telling you that we renounce the human innovations of the Christian Church and everything that is not upheld by the Word of God: (1) instruments, (2) the social gospel, (3) humanism, (4) support of human institutions, (5) modern ecumenical movement between the Christian Church, Disciple of Christ and the institutional churches of Christ, (6) and anything else that is not found in God’s Word, book, chapter and verse.

Today, after so many years of searching, I firmly believe that my/our search is over for the Lord’s Church. We want you to know that we want to be identified with the Lakeview church of Christ and serve under the leadership of the Elders. We ask that you accept us as brother and sister in Christ as we accept you.

Nelson Joseph Greene, Jr.

Karen Sue Greene

P.O. Box 161

Goodlettsville, TN 37071-0161

May 11th, 1986

Guardian of Truth XXX: 15, pp. 463-464
August 7, 1986

By Larry Ray Hafley

It was my good pleasure and privilege to serve as an assistant to brother Dick Blackford during his debate with Steve Epley, a Pentecostal preacher. The debate was held in the meeting house of the Pentecostals in Owensboro, Kentucky, during the week of June 9th.

Before I get into the pertinent details of the debate, a word must be said about my service as an assistant. Frankly, I was simply outstanding! Whenever Dick needed water to drink, I poured it for him. Whenever he needed papers, notes and charts shuffled, I came through. Not once did I spill a single drop of water. It was a tremendous performance. Of course, I was there to help Dick, but he was so well prepared and so thoroughly organized that I was not needed in the least. So, if you are in a debate and do not need any help with arguments and ideas, call me I can pour you water to drink with the best of them.

Seriously, the preparation Dick made was amazing. He had over 200 charts beautifully constructed and carefully arranged. Dick has a kind and loving manner of speech that comes across to those with whom he disagrees. Brother Blackford is not afraid of “going to the jugular” when it is necessary to do so, but he has a way of getting the truth to the minds of men without being personally offensive.

Those who despise debates because of their alleged tendency to “get nasty” should have attended this one. The audiences were respectful and attentive. The disputants pressed their points without rancor or bitterness.

Mr. Epley is an above average debater. He likes to debate and will likely meet other gospel preachers in debate. Do not take him lightly. He is an effective speaker and knows how to turn an argument. He follows the standard Pentecostal line, but he relies heavily on the material of Raymond Bishop and other adept Pentecostal debaters.

The building for the debate seated 225 people. There were 300 present the first night. There were a dozen or so Pentecostal preachers present. There were about that many gospel preachers present, too. Consider this. During the debate, brother Blackford preached to more “outsiders” than he will preach to in gospel meetings over the next 10 years. Think of the opportunity that represents. No, no one was baptized as a result of the debate; at least, not immediately, but the seed was sown in the hearts of men and women who needed to hear it. The Lord will give the increase; His word will not return unto Him void.

With careful planning and under the right circumstances, more debates need to be held. Let us uphold the hands of men like Dick Blackford in efforts of this kind.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 15, p. 458
August 7, 1986

By Robert F. Turner

In the early days of what is now the Oaks-West church in Burnet, a young man answered the gospel invitation by declaring his faith in Christ, and his desire to be baptized into Christ. We had no baptistry at that time, so we asked leaders of another church in Burnt, if we might use their baptistry. We were refused. The preacher said, “You will baptize him into a sect; bring him to me and I will baptize him into Christ.” I replied, “You mean the one baptizing him makes the difference?” No reply! We took the boy to a lake and baptized him “into Christ” – not because we did the baptizing, or because we uttered the right words, but because that is what takes place when one obeys Jesus Christ.

I doubt the boy had any “views” on institutionalism. He had learned that he was a sinner, that Christ had died for sinners, and wanted each of us to trust and obey Him. By repenting of his sins and obeying the Lord in baptism the young man came into an acceptable relationship with Christ, his sins being forgiven. My baptizing him, even if I espoused a “sect,” would not make this act “sectarian baptism.” Nor was his baptism valid or invalid on the basis of “church authority” to baptize. Baptism is not a “church” ordinance, it is the Lord’s ordinance, depending upon the subject’s compliance with the Lord’s teaching for its validity. The “sectarianism” of the church who heard his confession, if it had any, would not invalidate his baptism. Scriptural baptism is a covenant, direct and immediate, between the subject and his Lord.

The subject must have proper respect for Christ, and act in compliance with the Lord’s will, in order for that baptism to have divine approval. For example, if the subject submitted to baptism out of respect for a “church” ordinance, as an initiative ritual of some sort, that baptism could be called “sectarian.” If he was baptized for some reason other than that given in the gospel of Christ, seeking to obtain some benefit promised, not by the Lord, but by some religious group, we could call that sectarian baptism. If he ignored the instructions of the Lord concerning the nature of baptism, accepting sprinkling or pouring on some “church” authority rather than the immersion commanded by the Lord, that would be sectarian baptism. It is very possible that some young people (and older people) have been baptized to “join” a local “Church of Christ” – with nothing more than sectarian baptism.

One’s baptism depends upon the genuineness of one’s faith in Christ (Mk. 16:16); and genuine repentance, crucifying the “old man” or former way of life (Rom. 6:6). It is the symbolic burial, before the resurrection to walk in newness of life (Rom. 6:3-11). It is not “for remission of sins” because someone said this at the time of the immersion, but because divinity gave it this purpose (Acts 2:38; 22:16). It does not bring into the “right” church because it is the initiation ritual of any church, but because the Lord’s church consists of all who, come to Christ. We must put greater stress upon the true nature of baptism, and its indication of a changed allegiance and life, if we are to do much about the problem of sectarian baptism. If we continue to regard “our” baptisms as valid, and “their” baptisms as sectarian, we are arguing on the wrong basis (cf. Mk. 9:38f), and only adding fuel to the problem.

There are many things the scripturally baptized may not understand. But God-approved baptism involves conscious willful faith in Jesus as the Christ, recognition of one’s absolute need for Him, and a submission of man’s will to His will. Such a convert then grows in the knowledge of “all things whatsoever I command you” (Matt. 28:18-19). An attitude toward divine authority has been established that affects his treatment of all subsequent questions. His worship and work, collectively and individually, is dictated by his understanding of the Lord’s will, not to please himself or his peers. Church members who settle questions on the basis of traditional practices or “the great middle section,” have abandoned the Christ they once received and promised to serve.

When thinking along these lines some are prompted to ask, “Could a member of some denomination have been scripturally baptized?” It is certainly possible, although such baptism is contrary to most sectarian teaching, and the one with such an understanding is on his way out. One does not get into a denomination by scriptural baptism, and those who faithfully serve the Lord, growing in the knowledge and sincerely conforming their practice to each new truth learned, could not remain in a church whose worship and work is without divine authority. And when they do leave the denomination how are we to regard their baptism? The problem is not who baptized them, or where they were baptized. It is the far more basic, where they truly baptized? The fact that they are leaving some sect is encouraging, but we should be concerned that they are not simply “changing sects”; nor should we encourage them in a false hope.

It is true that sincerity in repentance and trusting faith are things we can but imperfectly judge, and some have concluded from this that we have no right to question anyone’s baptism. But that is tantamount to saying we can not help one another get to heaven. If our faith is true conviction, 94we also believe, and therefore speak” (2 Cor. 4:13). With loving concern we examine their fruits that we may know them (Matt. 7:16-20). 1 question people who come from churches believed to be in error because of concern for their souls. If one has only been sprinkled as an infant, or, if allegiance was to some church rather than unto Christ, it is in their interest that the error be corrected. In the final analysis you might say I am questioning their faith rather than their baptism, but it is done in exactly the same vein and for the same reason that I would welcome their assisting me to a better understanding of God’s will, and the way to heaven (1 Pet. 3:15).

Sectarian baptism gives a false hope, both in “our” churches and in others. It is in the interest of eternal souls that we should avoid sectarianism in our own lives, and do all possible to bring others into true fellowship with God.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 15, pp. 455, 471
August 7, 1986