Truth Magazine

By Don R. Hastings

In 3 John 9, 10, we read, “I wrote somewhat unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Therefore, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, prating against us with wicked words; and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would he forbiddeth and casteth them out of the church.”

The main characteristic of Diotrephes is that he “loveth to have the preeminence among them.” Brother Guy N. Woods, in his commentary on the New Testament epistles, wrote, “The word ‘preeminence,’ (philoproteuon, present active participle,) is derived from philoprotos, a fondness for being first; and is, alas, a disposition too often observable in our ranks today. The spirit manifested by this man Diotrephes is wholly foreign to the New Testament and opposed to the teaching of the Lord himself. All self-serving and personal aggrandizement must be eschewed and avoided if we would measure to the standard of primitive Christianity” (A Commentary On The New Testament Epistles, Vol. VII, p. 363).

It was the love for preeminence which led to the formation of the Roman Catholic Church. This attitude is prevalent in the Lord’s church and is still the cause of much dissension. The predominant characteristic of those who act like Diotrephes is still the love for preeminence. They want their will to be exalted above all others and woe be to anyone who would dare question their decision on anything.

Diotrephes may have felt that the apostle John would have been more greatly honored by the church than himself. His pride would not stand for that to happen. Those, who act like Diotrephes, are inflated with pride. This pride will lead to their spiritual destruction (Prov. 16:18). Pride keeps them from seeing their faults or listening to someone who disagrees with them. It keeps them from asking for forgiveness unless asking for forgiveness helps keep them in power. It causes them to be jealous of another’s ability. If they begin to suspect that someone else is beginning to be highly esteemed by the congregation, then they feel compelled to undermine his reputation. They view anyone, who has leadership ability and does his own thinking, as a rival. What great harm this does to the Lord’s church! What a great victory for Satan!

Those with the disposition of Diotrephes will split the local congregation if they don’t get their way. They will hold grudges. They will lie over and over again. They will claim they have been misunderstood. They will meet privately with brethren to try and persuade them to join their side. What strife and turmoil they cause. Weak brethren fall by the “way-side. ” Some brethren, who were once strong in the faith, may become less active in the Lord’s service.

I have met “Diotrephes” in several congregations and the meetings have not been pleasant. He is not always easy to identify when you first meet him, because he wears other names and disguises his true attitude. He can smile sweetly and do good deeds. He can be very charming until opposed. If he is opposed by someone who has very little influence in the congregation, he may choose to ignore such a one. However, if he is opposed by someone who has some influence, then that one will be severely rebuked by him “with malicious words” (KJV), usually when no one else is around. If the opposition continues, then “Diotrephes” will rebuke him publicly and endeavor to cast him “out of the church.”

I have found this attitude demonstrated in elders, preachers, and occasionally in other members. It is hard for many to take a position of authority without it going to their head. Because of this human weakness, God gave the qualification of “not self-willed” as a trait which must be possessed by a man who is appointed an elder (Tit. 1:7). The “Diotrephes” person is, also, “contentious” and usually “soon angry” (1 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 1:7). We often pay little attention to these qualifications, but spend considerable amount of time discussing whether a man must have one or two children to be qualified. It is extremely difficult to remove “Diotrephes” after he has become an elder. When he takes over the congregation and exalts himself as the head of the church, then the church ceases to belong to the Lord, for it belongs to him. The brethren become subject to him. Brethren, how can you stand by idly and permit this evil situation to go on? Where is your courage?

Peter said that elders are not to be tending the flock of God by “. . . lording it over the charge allotted to you, but making yourselves ensamples to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:2,3). In the commentary already mentioned in this article, I found this statement, “The words ‘lording it over’ (from katakurieuo, to rule over others high-handedly and autocratically) suggests an arrogant, domineering spirit, and is here positively forbidden to those who would serve acceptably as elders or bishops” (Ibid., p. 125). Elders should be an “ample to the brethren in humility. God will resist all with the attitude of Diotrephes (1 Pet. 5:5,6). No one should ever be made an elder if he has a love for power. Beware of men who campaign for the eldership.

If you choose to reveal the true identity of “Diotrephes ” be prepared for a bitter struggle. He will strongly resent being called “Diotrophes” even though he acts just like the Diotrephes John knew. Be prepared, also, to stand alone. Some brethren may sing about defending the cause of Christ, but really want no part of a battle even though the Lord’s church is being torn asunder. Paul told Timothy, “Fight the good fight of faith. . . ” (1 Tim. 6:12). Too many are keeping their spiritual sword in its sheath and not taking it out for use. Are you doing this or are you closing your eyes and saying, “I see no evil”?

I believe the Lord must find it a great abomination for someone to try to usurp His authority! This is an awful sin! How can we expect to find favor in the eyes of the Lord when we have dethroned Him and exalted ourselves in His place? We must remember that He has all authority and we are His bond servants. We are His sheep. We must humbly obey Him in all things. Let us greatly rejoice that we can serve in His kingdom and He will be our Shepherd! Let elders remember that they are shepherds serving under the chief Shepherd (1 Pet. 5:4).

I believe the greatest need, in the Lord’s church today, is qualified elders. God, in His matchless wisdom, made elders to be overseers of the flock. He gave qualifications for men to meet who seek the office of an elder (1 Tim. 3; Tit. 1). Those, who fulfill these qualifications and are appointed elders, are a blessing to the cause of Christ. Let us “esteem them highly in love for their work’s sake” (1 Thess. 5:13). There is no greater work than that of an elder. It is a work which demands tremendous sacrifice, energy, time and wisdom. Elders, do your work well for you will give an account to the Lord of lords (Heb. 13:17).

Preachers, proclaim faithfully the glorious gospel of Christ. Proclaim it in love. Exalt Christ, but crucify self (Gal. 2:20). Preach to please Christ, not men (Gal. 1:10).

Any of us may possess the attitude of Diotrephes. We are all capable of putting off humility and putting on pride. If we are guilty of this, we cause the Lord to weep and Satan to rejoice. If you have this attitude, repent with bitter tears at once. Call upon God to forgive you. Be very determined that this diabolical attitude will never again dwell in your heart.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 5, pp. 131-132
March 6, 1986

By Larry Ray Hafley

Much good preaching is done in an attempt to “restore the ancient order” of things divine. That is as it should be (2 Cor. 10:3-5). More teaching needs to be and will be presented in that noble effort. It is a constant, crying demand for those who love the Lord and His word (2 Tim. 4:2-8).

Perhaps all Christians can see neglected areas. Each has his own idea of a particular area of the faith that is not given the attention it deserves. Here is one aspect of truth that requires more emphasis:

“Ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine” (Acts 5:28). “And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ” (Acts 5:42). “Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). “I . . . have showed you, and taught you publicly, and from house to house” (Acts 20:20).

If daily teaching and preaching of the word “publicly, and from house to house” is not done, there will be no problems like unqualified elders, church discipline, or the music question, for there will be no churches, no elders and no worship. It is a sorry way cure a patient by letting him e. That is what is happening many places. Churches are curing their problems by dying of salvation starvation. The church dissipates, dissolves, and disappears. “Doc, I’ve got a horse with a horse with a broken leg. Oh, I can fix that. Shoot the horse.”

Imitate Jews

We speak and sing about our desire to be like Jesus. “Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession” concerning personal work. Jesus did much public preaching and teaching, but He also taught individuals. Nicodemus (Jn. 3), the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn. 4), and Zacchaeus (Lk. 19), are classic examples. If we would truly be like Jesus, we cannot ignore His pattern in this area. Our Lord was not always successful (Mk. 10:22). Even His own brothers did not accept Him for a time. However, He made use of occasions to talk privately to the lost about their souls. Unless we develop a sincere desire to see others saved and actively work with them on a personal level, we will not “be like Jesus.” No person was too lowly, no situation was too insignificant for our Lord to talk to someone about his soul. Dare we manifest less love than our blessed Savior?

Some Things Alone Will Not Work

Two gospel meetings a year with a “schedule of regular services” will not do that job. The meetings are often poorly planned, announced, advertised and attended. But that is food for another article. The problem is that the saints are not reaching and teaching others “daily and from house to house.” We may soothe our consciences with faithful attendance and with ready answers for denominational errors, but unless we are preaching the word in homes, cars, offices, schools, factories, wherever there is opportunity, we will die a slow death and lose our souls. There must be a sense of urgency about teaching the lost. A fifteen minute radio program alone will not do the job. The real problem is our own refusal to personally and directly confront our friends, neighbors and relatives with the gospel.

The world does not care about our meeting houses. They are not impressed with the fact that some man named Hafley will speak there with “no nightly collections.” The world is not beating down the doors to at tend our “series of gospel meetings. ” Please do not write and complain about my alleged attack against gospel of meetings. I am not assaulting them. I am saying that we must do more on a personal, individual level. Would you deny it? Meetings, radio programs and newspaper articles alone will not suffice. They are good and useful tools, but they must not supplant or displace “one on one” contact.

Churches rightly and properly conduct personal work programs and classes. But if the participants see Tuesday as “Personal Work” night (with a capital “P” and a capital “W”) and fail to teach those they meet, live and work with, it is incomplete at best, or a failure at worst. There is absolutely no substitute for personal evangelism or personal work (with a small “p” and a small “w”). I can neither avoid nor escape it. Can you? The duty, the responsibility to teach others will not go away. Every face you see, every person with whom you have a relationship, is a prospect, and an opportunity. Let that ring in your ears and haunt your mind as you live from day to day.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 5, p. 139
March 6, 1986

By Mike Willis

And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward mother, and toward all men, even a we do toward you: to the end be may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints (1 Thess. 3:12-13).

Each of us wants to be found “unblameable” at the second coming of Jesus. How is this possible? None of us can stand unblameable (sinless) in the absolute sense. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). In whatever sense we stand unblameable, our stand will not be merited by perfect obedience; instead it will be grounded in the grace of God as manifested to us in Jesus Christ. How does one become unblameable?

Increase And Abound In Love

Writing to those who had obeyed the gospel of Christ, Paul instructed the Thessalonians that they could become unblameable in holiness through love (1 Thess. 3:12-13). How does love lead one to become unblameable in holiness?

Some have the idea that love is an emotion, instead of an act of the will. It is equated with a warm feeling toward one another and is thought is to be affection. Love is an act of the will instead of the emotion. Jesus said, “Love your enemies” (Matt. 5:43-44). Sinful emotional responses toward enemies are hatred, bitterness, revenge, anger, wrath, etc. Yet, Jesus said we should love our enemies – love those with reference to whom we have only negative emotions, for whom we have no affection, and perhaps toward whom we even harbor ill feelings. The command to love your enemies demonstrates that love is an act of the will which controls the emotions.

When we understand what love does, we can see how increasing and abounding in love will make one unblameable in holiness.

What Love Prohibits

Displaying love as a fruit of the Spirit will prevent men from doing some of the things which destroy holiness. John said, “He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes” (1 Jn. 2:9-11). Love will keep me from displaying sinful dispositions and. actions toward my brother. Here are some things it will stop:

1. Revenge. Paul commanded, “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head” (Rom. 12:19-21). A man who loves his brother will not seek revenge when he is sinned against.

2. Blasphemy. Blasphemy means to “speak against.” Some men blaspheme their brethren, seeking to destroy another’s honorable reputation through slander, innuendo, whispering, backbiting, and other sins of the tongue. One who loves his enemy will not blaspheme him; how much more should this be true of one’s brother!

3. Bitterness and hatefulness. These two sins of the heart can consume one’s soul like a cancer consumes one’s body. These dispositions of the heart make one see every action which another does with jaundiced eye, resulting in evil surmising, seeing offences where none exist, and suspicion. Love will keep me from doing many sinful things because I am commanded to manifest the right attitude and act the proper way toward my brethren.

Have you noticed that some who preach so much on love act in a manner which demonstrates an absence of love? They preach so much on love that one would think sugar could not melt in their mouth. However, these very men slander, backbite, gossip, and do many other things which demonstrate an absence of love.

The Obligations Of Love

Love is not a merely negative force. It obligates man to act with concern for another’s best interests. Jesus said, “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the ‘ prophets” (Matt. 7:12). The “Golden Rule,” as this verse has been called, does not say, “Whatsoever ye would that men should not do to you, do not ye even so to them.” Instead, it instructs me to look for what I wish others would do for me and then do that for my brother. If I wanted my brother to invite me over for lunch, I should invite him over; if I wanted my brother to visit me when I am sick, I should visit him when he is sick. Hence, love obligates me to do what is best for my brother.

In thinking of my brother, I should put his needs above my own. John wrote,

Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our fives for the brethren. But whoso hath this world’s goods and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? (1 Jn. 3:16-17)

For a man to lay down his life in behalf of his brother, he must put the needs of his brother above his own needs.

Love obligates me to be concerned for the eternal destiny of my brother. Hence, love obligates me to reprove, rebuke, and exhort my brother. Sometimes brethren act as if one does not love his brother when he rebukes him. While it is true that a person can rebuke his brother with an absence of love (e.g., “I really told him off”), true love issues its rebuke from the concern that the brother’s soul not be lost in hell.

Love demands kindness (1 Cor. 13:4), prohibits unseemly behavior (aschemoneo: behave disgracefully, rude, unmannerly – 1 Cor. 13:5), and commands thoughtfulness and concern for the other person. The graces and virtues which become part of the Christian’s character stem from love.

Love And Holiness Tied Together

As a person looks at the demands which love makes on his actions, he can easily understand how growing in love makes him “unblameable in holiness.” Where revenge, spiteful words and behavior, blasphemy, evil surmising, hatefulness, and bitterness reign, holiness is absent. Where kindness, consideration, rebuke in love, and similar virtues are manifested, holiness exists. Hence, love leads one to be unblameable in holiness.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 5, pp. 130, 150
March 6, 1986

By Luther W. Martin

During the few years between the publication of the Book of Mormon (1830), and the death of its “Author and Proprietor,” Joseph Smith (1844), much effort was put forth to convince the doubtful world of the truth, accuracy and integrity of the Book of Mormon. In the Journal of Discourses, published by the Utah Mormons (Vol. 11, p. 293), we copy:

Before this was offered to the world, the Lord confirmed it by opening the heavens in broad day light, and sending down an holy angel, who descended in the presence of four individuals, three besides Mr. Smith, and the angel took the plates, and turned them over leaf after leaf, while, at the same time, the voice of the Lord out of the heavens told them it had been translated correctly, commanding them to send forth their testimony to all nations, kingdoms, tongues, and people. They accordingly attached their printed testimony in connection with the Book of Mormon.

At the conclusion of the first edition of the Book of Mormon, we copy the following excerpt:

. . . and we also know that they (the golden plates, LWM) have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety, that the work is true. . . . Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, Martin Harris.

In a work entitled A Compendium of the Doctrines of the Gospel, by Richards & Little (p. 273) also of the Utah Mormons the following appears:

In council with the Twelve Apostles, Joseph Smith said, “I told brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”

So, Joseph Smith and his three friends serve as the 41witnesses” and give testimony, that: (1) An angel came down in broad day light. (2) The voice of God from heaven spoke. (3) The Book of Mormon is “the most correct book in the world.” And (4) it will get a man closer to God than any other book!

All three of Smith’s witnesses became apostates by 1838, some eight years after the publication of the Book of Mormon. On page 236 of The Myth of Mormon Inspiration by William Brodie Crouch, we copy as follows:

In 1838, while confined to Liberty Jail in Missouri, Smith wrote of these men, and others:

” . . . ill bred and the ignorant, such as Hinkle, Covill, Phelps, Avard, Reed, Peck, Cleminson, and various others, who are so very ignorant, that they cannot appear respectable in any decent and civilized society, and whose eyes are full of adultery, and cannot cease from sin. Such characters as McLellin, John Whitmer, D. Whitmer, O. Cowdery, and Martin Harris, are too mean to mention, and we had like to have forgotten them ” (Crouch states that this came from photostated papers in the possession of Dr. James D. Bales, Searcy, Arkansas).

Notice that the last three men named were Smith’s “three witnesses” to his Book of Mormon. Whitmer and Cowdery were excommunicated from the Mormon Church, on April 6, 1938. . . . eight years to the day, from the beginning of the first Mormon congregation. Martin Harris had already been “kicked out” earlier.

Some Examples of the First Edition

In his book, Mormonism and Inspiration, Jack Free calls attention to the fact that from the first edition of the Book of Mormon to the present, some 6,593 changes have been made in punctuation, and some 5,256 changes in spelling, wording and phraseology, have occurred. These demonstrate the falsehood of Smith’s statement, that the Book of Mormon was “the most correct book on earth. “

We copy some examples showing the lack of correct grammar.

“And it had came to pass. . . ” (1 Nephi, p. 14).

“And all these things of which I have spoken was done . . .” (p. 23).

” . . . Nephi, did make bellowses wherewith to blow the fire. . . ” (p. 43).

” . . . the law had ought to be done away . . . (2 Nephi, p. 106).

” . . . there is no works of darkness. . . ” (p. 118). the wild branches have grown, and have overran the roots thereof. . . ” (Book of Jacob, p. 134).

“. . . that many of you have began to search for gold. . ” (p. 125).

” . . . and this he done, that he might overthrow the doctrine of Christ. . . ” (p. 140).

“. . . according to his judgments, which is just. . .”(Book of Omni, p. 150).

” . . . in all things which is good. . .”(p. 150).

” . . . many things . . . has been fulfilled. . .” (Words of Mormon, p. 152).

“. . A should have wore these bands. (Book of Mosiah, p. 169).

” . . . and this he done. . .” (p. 216).

” . . . that they was expressly repugnant to the commandments of God” (p. 220).

” . . . I have wrote unto you. . .” (Book of Alma, p. 377).

“. . . and the curse of God had fell upon them. . .” (p. 270).

” . . . I would that ye should adhear to the word of God. (p. 398). (Notice the spelling of adhear.)

” . . . they were exceeding fraid. . . ” (p. 392).

“. . . even back by the same way which they had came. . ” (p. 392)

” . . . declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher had ought to become popular; and they ought not to labor with their own hands, but that they had ought to be supported by the people. (Book of Alma, p. 221).

“. . . and this he done. . .” (p. 225).

” . . . Alma had came to the city. . . ” (p. 243).

“. . . And after he had eat and was filled. . . ” (p. 244).

“. . . our first parents could have went forth. . . ” (p. 257).

“. . . for he had slew many of them. . .”(p. 273).

” . . . even until they had arriven to the land of Middoni. . .” (p. 282).

“. . . that there might not be no more sorrow. (p. 303).

“. . . the Devil would never have no power. . . ” (p. 359).

Conclusion

There are scores, even hundreds of similar mistakes in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. But the ones given above serve to show the language used “in the most correct book in the world” . . according to Joe Smith.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 4, pp. 117, 120
February 20, 1986