Truth Magazine

By Irven Lee

Secular humanism claims to be a religion, and these humanists use the school room to promote their philosophy as faithful preachers use the pulpit to teach the gospel. The atheistic humanists would forbid Christians to teach the story of creation, the deity of Christ, and the wonderful principles of righteousness that are taught in the Bible while they insist on teaching the theories of evolution and a disrespect for authority of any kind. The atheists claim that the Constitution demands the separation of church and state. The Constitution forbids Congress to establish a religion for the people, but the founding fathers did not intend that everything be done that possibly could be done to destroy faith in Christ and respect for His pattern of behavior. The very opposite was true. Our legal system in America has been based on the Judaeo-Christian system of righteousness. In the early days of the public schools often the teacher in a one room school was the preacher, and he was expected to read the Bible and to build respect for it. It was often one of the main textbooks he used in teaching. Long memory passages would be assigned from it, and the passages would be discussed. Too often false doctrines were taught, but the students came to have a respect for the Bible as the word of God.

As recently as my high school days, we had chapel (a worship assembly) every morning. One preacher or another was invited to speak in this assembly every Monday morning. On some other days, some faculty member would speak on topics that were intended to motivate or challenge us to the more useful life. At the close of school some preacher was invited to deliver a baccalaureate sermon as a special challenge to the graduates. This, in fact, continued until very recent years.

During the first two centuries of our nation about all the private schools were started as “Bible schools” or schools for religious training. One of the very sad changes in the last century was the turning to evolution, so called higher criticism of the Bible, and other aspects of atheism in the “Department of Religion” in each older private university. Atheists taught religion in these schools that were started by men of conviction. This was a ridiculous inconsistency, and this sort of training for denominational preachers has come down to the average citizens, destroying respect for the authority of Christ and His word. We need to keep our children away from ,’modernists” or “liberals” in religion. They are certainly wolves trying to appear to be sheep. Ultra liberal religious groups like the Unitarians are hotbeds of humanism. The Unitarian preacher is likely to be a secular humanist (atheist). Such preachers have no God to whom they may pray, no Bible with a divine message, and no heaven for which they may hope. They are indeed “without hope and without God in the world” Eph. 2:12). Their position in life is parallel to that of the pagan in the ancient Roman Empire.

Millions in our generation are going back to paganism rather than back to the Bible. Marriage ties are broken, many seek money by dishonest means, violence is very common, and there is an amazing lack of reverence for the name of God. The beauty of holiness goes unnoticed while many seek for satisfaction in alcohol and other drugs, with selfishness, child abuse, and covetousness taking the place of brotherly kindness, happy homes, and honest labor. What can devout parents do to train their children in the right way of the Lord in such a wicked world?

Alert parents are alarmed as they see what unbelievers are doing to our world. It is because of changes like those mentioned above that a few parents are taking their children out of the public schools to train them in private schools where it is hoped that faith will be strengthen ed rather than destroyed, and that righteousness will be encouraged rather than sexual immorality, hedonism, and situation ethics. The number of private schools has greatly increased in recent years. Parents are taxed to support public schools, but beyond this cost thousands are supporting private schools by tuition and gifts as they search for something better for their children.

Some parents are taking their children out of public schools to train them at home. Do they do the job? Are these children cut off from adequate education for the modern labor market? Which mother or father is capable of giving instruction in all fields of learning that are now important? Children need to mature in their ability to work with others. Will they get this in home training?

When alarmed parents make special moves to see that their children are trained in a safe environment, they should remember that we all are still in the world. Television, pornographic literature, and unbelieving neighbors are all about us. We would have to get out of the world to avoid all human contact (1 Cor. 5: 10).

Children need to be with people their age. They must learn how to deal with others or they will not be able to carry out their responsibilities as Christians or to provide for their families. The Lord is not looking for hermits. We are to be trained to live and work with people. Christ wanted His disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (Mark 16:15). In the book of Acts we learn of some wonderful men who were busy at work in the wicked world. They fought a good fight against the sin and crime of that day. Look to the last part of the first chapter of Romans for a description of the people of that day. Are not the sins mentioned there the same sins that alarm us today?

Guardian of Truth XXX: 4, p. 110
February 20, 1986

By Fred Melton

It has been said that behind every successful man there is usually a wise woman. Even the unmarried Apostle Paul found spiritual strength in those he called honorable or “noble women” among the Greek churches (Acts 13:16, 17; Rom. 16:1-4). 1 myself have found such women in almost every church I have been associated with. These women seem to have a special relationship toward the gospel of Christ and those who are dedicated to teaching it.

There is not the slightest indication of the “feminist” attitude among these spiritual giants. Indeed, at least one rather tongue-in-cheek appraisal of the feminist movement was expressed as, “Why should we lower ourselves to the social and moral equality of the men in this world.” These women do not need any social adjustments for they are already one of the greatest blessings in the church today.

The wives of foreign workers and those in other hard places may be singled out as notable in respect of dedication to preaching the gospel. Some of these “foreign women” have started their adult lives as virtual teenagers in what the rest of us might regard as intolerable conditions. Separated from family and friends, they are often thrown into an alien and sometimes hostile world where they must make new friends, learn different customs and sometimes a new language. This dedication can only be explained by a strong love of God and a desire to please their husbands.

Such women are to be highly commended and respected for their work’s sake as they are “noble women” in the making.

Guardian of Truth XXX: 4, p. 111
February 20, 1986

By Randy Medlin

I won’t name the congregation lest we embarrass someone unduly. But it finally happened. The Gospel meeting was going on throughout the week. The preacher also happened to be the coach for the Pee Wee Football league. Friday night was the Gospel meeting night. But Friday night was also tournament night for the preacher’s football team. Guess where he was? That’s right. Guess what the congregation immediately did? That’s right too. Fired on the spot. We won’t have a preacher whose spiritual priorities are so misarranged as to attend a football game over a gospel meeting.

I can understand their displeasure. What I can’t understand is why those same brethren can’t apply the same spiritual standard to themselves. A Gospel meeting is going on at the local congregation. Brother A misses on Monday because it’s bowling night. Brother and sister B on Tuesday night because there is a movie on the television they have really been wanting to see. Sister C can’t make it on Wednesday night because she worked hard all day and was just too tired. The D family was working in the yard, taking advantage of Daylight Saving Time, and when they looked down at their watch, what do you know – it was 7: 15. No way they could get ready and go. Brother E considers it his Christian “duty” to go at least one night, and so Thursday’s the night. Oh, and don’t forget brother and sister F – they had company come in Thursday afternoon. “We haven’t seen them in four months, so we just can’t go.”

But come Friday night and the preacher’s not there! What in the world could that man be thinking! We’ve got to get a man who “seeks first the kingdom.” Rightly so. The man was in error. But most of the preachers I know are looking for members who also “seek first the kingdom.” Are you one?

Guardian of Truth XXX: 4, p. 111
February 20, 1986

By Tommy L. McClure

Introduction

Please note that the word “wrong” is in quotation marks in the title, indicating an accommodative or adaptive use of the word.

Many sermons have been preached and scores of articles have been written on the subject of attitudes. Yet, I make no apology for adding another article to the list; the matters herein set forth need to be stressed repeatedly.

When faithful gospel preachers openly and vigorously oppose denominationalism, sins of immorality, sins of the tongue, digression, compromise, etc., they are often accused of having “the wrong attitude.” That the accusation may be, and probably is, just in some cases, will be readily granted by all fair-minded persons. On the other hand, all must admit that in many cases the accusation is untrue and unjust, and made by those who have the wrong attitude themselves for the purpose of lessening the influence of the person who has opposed their sinful practice or that of some of their close friends. In view of this all too prevalent condition among members of the Lord’s church, we need to go back to the divine blueprint and consider some statements that were made by servants of God, men guided by the Holy Spirit, in Bible times.

Stephen Before The Council

The account of Stephen before the Jewish council is available to all who will read (Acts 6,7). The kind of man Stephen was is made clear. The apostles said, “Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. . . . And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost. . . ” (Acts 6:3-5). Thus, the saints in Jerusalem regarded Stephen as a man “of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom; ” and Luke, the inspired historian, spoke of him as “a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost. ” Surely, the attitudes and manners of such a man are worth considering.

Stephen was not adverse to religious discussions as are some preacher-attitude criticizers of today. ” . . there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake” (6:9,10).

Unable to make any progress for their cause by debating with Stephen, his enemies suborned (“secretly persuaded” – NIV) false witnesses who said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God” (6:11). They further said, “This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law” (6:13). This was done in a determined and desperate attempt to obstruct the onward march of truth! Needless to say, this was not the first or last time such has been done.

In chapter 7 Stephen gave a rather detailed resume of God’s dealings with the Israelites in which he emphasized God’s goodness toward them and their unfaithfulness toward Him. He concluded by saying, “Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so did ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it” (7:51-53).

My, my! What a “bad” and “repulsive” attitude Stephen must have had! The very idea of telling people to their face that they are stiff-necked! The very thought of a preacher being so “unwise” and “harsh” as to call people betrayers and murderers and accuse them of being so depraved as to resist the Holy Spirit! “Had the charge been so,” Stephen should have known he “wouldn’t get anywhere” by making it, and would “only make bad matters worse.” Evidently, Stephen had not learned the “first lesson of tact.” And, as though all that weren’t enough, Stephen had such a “cruel” attitude that he tried his best to “embarrass” those 66patient listeners” by bringing up things their fathers had done before them, things over which they had no control whatsoever! What a “pity” that Stephen acted so “unwisely” and “drove so many precious souls away from the church! ” If he had just used a little “wisdom” and “spoken in a kinder tone of voice” many of these “poor lost souls” would be “saved” today! It is no wonder these people stoned Stephen; he “asked for it” and “had it coming to him.”

Who believes it? Not I, for one! Yet, this is the way some people talk about the attitude of preachers who vigorously condemn sins of which they (or some of their friends or relatives) are guilty. If Stephen were living today, I seriously doubt that he would last as long as a snow ball on the Fourth of July in some churches “of Christ” (?).

John The Baptist

John The Baptist stands near the top of the list of Bible characters who had the “wrong” attitude. He was so “harsh” and “bitter” that “. . when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, 0 generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And now also is the axe laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire” (Matt. 3:7-10).

Why the very idea of a preacher telling people to their face that they were a “generation of vipers!” How “unfortunate” it was that this “rash, name calling” preacher took such an “unfair advantage” of these “prominent people of the community.” Had John’s statements been directed by “prudence” and “love,” he could have influenced these “respectable citizens” to “accept him.” He should have known that their hearers are in danger of being cast into the fire!

Sounds silly, doesn’t it? Yet like statements are being made by the soft set in many congregations today when faithful preachers stand foursquare against error and sin.

The Apostle Paul

The apostle Paul is another Bible character who had the “wrong” attitude. In spite of his statement, “Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his” (Rom. 8:9), his attitude was very “unbecoming and repulsive.”

Luke reveals the fact that when Sergius Paulus, a prudent man called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God, Elymas, the sorcerer, withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith (Acts 13:6-11). Just look at what Paul told him: “O full of all subtlety and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?” (v. 10) He could have said, “Sir, it appears to me that you might be in error on this matter and that the course you have taken might be ill-advised. However, I don’t want to appear to be offensive to anybody, so if you think best I’ll say nothing more to your friend. After all, I certainly don’t want to break up such a nice friendship as you men have established.” But no, not Paul! He was so “ill-tempered” that he turned on this “poor sorcerer” like a lion; he told him he was full, not just tainted with, but full of all subtlety and mischief; called him a child of the devil and an enemy of all righteousness; and, as if that were not enough to “hurt his feelings,” he accused him of perverting the right ways of the Lord! Paul was a “good one” to be talking about the Spirit of Christ!

Silly, isn’t it? As Paul said, “I speak after the manner of men” (Gal. 3:15). You know as well as do I that if a preacher were “guilty” of saying that (or something akin to it) today to the most ungodly rascal on earth, many churches “of Christ” (?) wouldn’t have him! Because of his “bad attitude,” it is very doubtful that the apostle Paul would be “owed to preach in any of the “marching” and “morally liberated” churches of the present time.

Jesus Christ

Among Bible characters who had the “wrong” attitude, the Lord Jesus Christ stands at the very top of the list. Note one example: “And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves” (Matt. 21:12,13).

Isn’t that something? How “rash” and “unwise” and “discourteous” can a person be? And, what makes it “look so bad” is that Jesus seemingly did that without any warning whatsoever. The very idea of taking such an “unfair advantage”! The very idea of “running people off” that way! Didn’t the Lord know He would never be able to have any “influence” over them in the future? Didn’t He know that He would never be able to teach them the truth if He “ran them off”? If the tables of the money changers and the seats of the dove sellers were offensive to the Lord, He could have kindly asked the men who operated them to set them aside and thus displayed a “Christian-like attitude.” If He had gone about it “in the right spirit” they might have taken them out without a murmur. But the Lord was one of those fellows who “didn’t know how to win friends and influence people” nor “how to get things done.” He was so “uncouth” that He literally turned the tables and seats over and accused the men who operated them of being a bunch of thieves! It’s a wonder He wasn’t crucified before He was!

Again, I have spoken “after the manner of men ” – men who have a distorted and unscriptural concept of love and the Spirit of Christ and who put a higher estimate on the friendship of worldings than on the truth of God’ Jesus Christ did not have the wrong attitude! Yet, if the Lord were on the earth and did such as that described in Matthew 21:12,13 – it matters not where He might do it – some professed Christians would cry: “Wrong attitude! Harsh! Unkind! Unchristian! No trace of the Spirit of Christ!”

Conclusion

This article has not been written for the purpose of defending any attitude that is really wrong or any action that is truly unchristian on the part of this preacher nor any other. It is written for the purpose of causing people to think; for the purpose of causing people to see both sides of the attitude question. Let’s all strive at all times to manifest the right attitude. That is surely important! But when our wrong doings are condemned, let’s make the necessary corrections, instead of trying to pass the matter off by saying, “That preacher just has the wrong attitude.”

Guardian of Truth XXX: 4, pp. 112-113
February 20, 1986