Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Halfey

Our Lord never doubted or denied the Old Testament “the scripture,” said He, “cannot be broken” (Jn. 10:35). His appeal to Moses and the prophets was constant and consistent with His confidence in them. Our Savior leaned on “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” during His debate with the devil. “It is written” was His answer to “the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (Matt. 4:4 & Deut. 8:3; Matt. 4:7 & Deut. 6:16; Matt. 4:10 & Deut. 6:13). For Jesus, “What is written in the law?” was the answer of God.

Anyone, therefore, who claims to be a Christian but who questions the authenticity, veracity and integrity of the Old Testament is challenging the knowledge and faith of the Lord. To do so is to cast a pall of doubt over the Lord’s Godhood. Since the Lord Jesus Christ is the divine Son of God, the anointed Savior and appointed Judge of the world, the Old Testament is the very word of God. You cannot claim Jesus as your inviolate Lord without acclaiming the Old Testament as the infallible word. “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words” (Jn. 5:46, 47).

References to Old Testament Events

Jesus specifically alluded to several Old Testament events and characters. He fully accepted their reality and historicity. A few are listed below.

(1) Solomon’s wealth – Matt. 6:28, 29; 12:42; 1 Kings 3:13; 10: 1-23.

(2) Solomon & Queen of Sheba – Matt. 12:42; 1 Kings 10.

(3) Jonah, Fish & Nineveh – Matt. 12:39-41; Jonah.

(4) David & Shewbread – Matt. 12:3, 4; 1 Sam. 21:6.

(5) Noah & Flood – Matt. 24:36-39; Gen. 6 & 7.

(6) Lot and Sodom – Lk. 17:28, 29; Gen. 19:24, 25.

(7) Lot’s Wife – Lk. 17:32; Gen. 19:26.

(8) Adam, Eve, Marriage, Creation – Matt. 19:4, 5; Gen. 1:27; 2:24.

(9) Serpent of Brass – Jn. 3:14-16; Num. 21:4f.

(10) Moses & Manna – Jn. 6:32, 49; Ex. 16:15.

(11) Elijah & Drought – Lk. 4:25; 1 Kings 17: 1.

(12) Elijah & Widow – Lk. 4:26; 1 Kings 17:9f.

(13) Elisha & Naarnan – Lk. 4:27; 2 Kings 5.

(14) Abel’s murder – Matt. 23:35; Gen. 4.

(15) Tyre & Sidon – Matt. 11:21; Ezek. 26-28.

(16) Moses & Burning Bush – Lk. 20:37; Ex. 3:1-6.

(17) Abraham, Isaac, Jacob & Prophets – Lk. 13:28; Gen.

(18) Patriarchs, Moses & circumcision – Jn. 7:22; Gen. 17; Lev. 12:3.

Were these people and events actual or imaginary? Were they fact or fantasy? Jesus thought and taught that they were real. Was He wrong? Was He mistaken? Was He deceived? God forbid! However, He was in error if the persons above never existed or if they (having existed) never did what the Lord said they did. One cannot have it both ways. To debunk these Old Testament accounts is to dethrone our Lord, deny His Sonship and destroy all hope for life and immortality. Without Jesus, we will all die in our sins and be lost forever and ever, world without end. So, the skeptic may scorn and scoff, the mocker may murmur and malign, but the word of the Lord endureth forever. The Old Testament is the word of God as Jesus is the Son of God. The empty tomb of Joseph of Arimathea establishes both facts.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 22, p. 681
November 21, 1985

By Bill Hall

“Do all things without murmurings and questions; that ye may become blameless and harmless, children of God without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom ye are seen as lights in the world” (Phil. 2:14, 15).

The Philippian Christians had to serve God in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. They were neither the first nor the last to find themselves under such circumstances. In fact, every person who ever served God did so “in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation,” and so must we.

Surely no-one would question the perverseness of the generation in which we live. We are surrounded by indecency. Moral filth lines the shelves of the neighborhood store and video shop. Drug scandals rock the sports and entertainment worlds. Christians working in factories are exposed to bad language, filthy stories, and rumors of immorality among their fellow employees. Our children attend schools that are filled with wickedness. We are not overstating the case – this is the world as it really is, a crooked and perverse generation indeed.

We face two possible choices as Christians: (1) try to clean up the society in which we live, so that we and our children can serve God without the pressures and evil influences that presently exist. We would not discourage reasonable effort on the part of individual Christians along these lines, but success in any such efforts will be on a small scale. It matters not how hard we work at it, by and large, the world will still be a corrupt world when we die: evil will still exist on TV and in the movies; pornography will still be a problem; corruption will still exist in government; and schools will still have their ungodly influences. Our purpose as Christians is to call people out of darkness through the gospel and into light. We can do that, but efforts to eradicate darkness will for the most part be futile. Fortunately, we have another choice: (2) make up our minds to serve God faithfully in whatever environment we find ourselves. Ths is the only viable choice for the Christian.

It can be done. Consider Noah’s generation when “every imagination of the thoughts of (man’s) heart was only evil continually” (Gen. 6:5); or Lot’s generation when ten righteous souls could not be found in all of Sodom; or Elijah’s generation when wicked Ahab served as king in the wicked nation of Israel; or Daniel’s generation when as a young man he found himself in a foreign land facing pressures to eat the king’s meats and drink his wines (Dan. 1:8); or the apostles’ generation when Rome ruled the world and the hypocritical scribes and Pharisees dominated the religious scene. What were these men doing in such crooked and perverse circumstances? They were serving God! That’s what they were doing! The point is this: if these could serve God in the midst of the crooked and perverse circumstances in which they found themselves, and if the Philippians could shine “as lights in the world” in the midst of their crooked and perverse generation, so can we. Our eternal destiny is not determined by the environment in which we live, but by our own determination to be what we ought to be in whatever environment we find ourselves. We must lay aside our excuses, both for ourselves and our children, and make up our minds to say with Joshua, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord” (Josh. 24:15). This we shall do, and with God’s help we shall overcome.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 22, p. 684
November 21, 1985

By Ron Halbrook

Just as emphatically as unity is pleasant, sin and division among people professing to serve God are unpleasant (Psa. 133:1). Yet, heresy and schism serve the providential purpose of keeping distinct the line God has drawn between righteousness and unrighteousness. “For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you” (1 Cor. 11:19). When we continue to speak the truth in love, those who love not the truth will manifest themselves by causing “divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned” – until finally we must mark and avoid them (Eph. 4:15; 2 Thess. 2:10-12; Rom. 16:17-18). Or, they will manifest themselves by initiating a separation so that they can pursue their apostate course without the restraint of truth. “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us” (1 Jn. 2:19). These principles resulted in a major division over institutionalism during the last 30-40 years.

When men transgress the doctrine of Christ, we cannot aid or abet them in their error (2 Jn. 9-11), but we can and should seek ways to turn them or those deluded by them back to the truth. The end does not justify the means (Rom. 3:8). The evil of compromise as a means to “reach” them makes us guilty of not walking “uprightly according to the truth of the gospel” (Gal. 2:14). We may have legitimate opportunities to teach and reach them when, in the passing of time, their departure from truth produces more and more ungodliness (2 Tim. 3:13). As the apostasy of the last 3040 years has proceeded from bad to worse, some in the liberal camp have cried out against the progression of decay and some have come out of error (2 Cor. 6:14-18). Others will persist in both promoting and protesting liberalism without leaving it.

Christians In All the Sects?

Thinking about these matters which are discussed in the Ephraim’s Idols column, Frank Walton (Rt. 1, Box 233A, Charlotte, TN 37036) sent us some clippings and comments. The Christian Chronicle of March 1984 reported, “A Center for Restoration Studies will be established at Abilene Christian University.” One of the purposes will be to project “Restoration heritage into the mainstream of American scholarly discussion.” Brother Walton observes that increasing consciousness of the “mainstream” of American scholarship and religion was characteristic of the ultra-liberal Disciples of Christ in their historical development. He also noted the March 1984 Action article by Reuel Lemmons on “Keepers of Orthodoxy” which protests “the ultimate in sectarian foolishness – the self assumed claim that we are the only Christians (sic).” Lemmons in his latter years at the helm of the Firm Foundation and more recently in Action has promoted the sectarian foolishness that there are Christians in all the sects. His new paper, Image, will reflect the same image of error.

Brother Walton explains,

I was shocked to read bro. Lemmons’ comments. He has gone so far as to say that we really can’t know right from wrong. Being a Christian is at best a fuzzy concept. Soon there will be a split in the institutional camp as groups drift further apart. I believe that we can reach and teach the truth to some of the more conservative element in the institutional camp as they honestly see the fruit of their digression.

It will take great patience, love, kindness and meekness, but with great, fervent faith it can be done. Many in the institutional camp object to what is going on, but we’re not available and making contact with these alienated brethren beginning to see the light. Let’s pray and work hard to do all we can. Time is short.

As to who is a Christian, it is the man who accepts God’s ace for the pardon of alien sins, and accepts it in God’s ordained way, and no one else! Not just the one who hears the gospel, or believes it, or repents of sinful living, or confesses Christ as God’s Son – but the one who proceeds upon those steps to be immersed in water. That immersion must be upon the authority of Christ, not on denominational authority, and for the remission of sins, not for any other reason. Mark 16:16 shows that scriptural baptism is as essential to salvation from alien sins as faith is. Acts 2:38 shows that scriptural baptism is as necessary as repentance – both looking to the object of the remission of sins. One must be baptized with the understanding of baptism that then, and only then, will his sins be washed away by Christ’s blood – then, and not before then, he will be alive in Christ – then he will be added by God to the undenominational body of Christ, and added to nothing else (Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:34, 17-18; 1 Cor. 12:13).

If a man is baptized “to obey God” or for some similar generic reason, or if he is doing it to “join the church of his choice” or some similar sectarian purpose, he is not a Christian. Here, on the purpose of baptism, is where Rubel Shelly in I Just Want to be a Christian and Lemmons in the journals are compromising the conditions of pardon in an effort to broaden the horizons of grace and unity. They have no more right to sacrifice immersion as the procedure of Bible baptism than to sacrifice its purpose. Thomas and Alexander Campbell tried to make some room for the “pious unimmersed” as being Christians among the sects. Do Lemmons and Shelly embrace “the ultimate in sectarian foolishness – the self assumed claim that the immersed are the only Christians???” Another way these men broaden the lines of unity is by claiming God’s grace asper 1 John 1:7 covers “Christians among the sects” who sin by involvement with sectarian names, worship, and organization. Such “sectarian foolishness” makes John contradict himself in 2 John 9-11.

Brother Walton is right about “a split in the institutional camp.” There is a large number of well known preachers in the institutional camp who will not go with Lemmons and Shelly. We should do all we can in the good spirit suggested by brother Walton to persuade such brethren to see that their present woes are the result of their institutional theories which undermine the Bible as a perfect and final pattern of true Christianity.

Moderate vs. Mainstream Movement

Occasionally, someone wonders if the pains of the progressive cancer of liberalism will result in a general movement among those moderately infected toward repentance and reapproachment with faithful brethren. History says, “no. ” The moderates today are not a bit more upset than were the moderates 100 years ago. The December 1869 Prospectus of The Apostolic Times promised “the propagation and defense of the Gospel as it came pure from the lips of Christ and of the Apostles” without “even the semblance of a compromise. ” No more powerful and popular men could have been grouped together as Editors: Moses E. Lard, Robert Graham, Winthrop H. Hopson Lanceford B. Wilkes, and John W. McGarvey. Within two years there were about 5,000 subscribers.

But by 1885 the momentum was lost and another effort was made under the name The Gospel Guide. With sadness, David Lipscomb observed in 1889,

Bro. McGarvey retires from the Guide, as exegetical editor. This takes the last of the conservative element from the Guide. The Times was started specifically by Hopson, Lard, McGarvey, Wilkes and Graham, to steer a middle course, between the latitudinarianism course of the [Christian] Standard and the course of the [Gospel Advocate in adhering firmly to the scripture precedents in work as well as worship. They supported the societies, but opposed the organ. They would depart from apostolic precept and example in the work and order of the church so far as the pastor distinct from the eldership is concerned, but would in the worship so far as the organ is concerned adhere to the scriptures. The position is an illogical one, and cannot be maintained. When we take the liberty to set aside the Divine order as developed in the precepts and examples of the inspired men, in one point, we license and invite others to do it in any and all other points they wish.

This end shows the impossibility of compromising principles. No paper ever started among us with such an array of popular talent as did the Times. . . . Their labor, the paper they built up has been turned to destroy that which they brought to their work, they have acted simply as a rear-guard to protect the army they aimed to oppose (“Resignation,” Gospel Advocate, 17 July 1889, p. 459).

Today papers such as The Spiritual Sword published by the Getwell Church of Christ in Memphis, TN, Ira Rice’s Contending for the Faith, and The Restorer edited by Gary Workman are filling a role much like that of The Apostolic Times. Some fine principles are stated and needed protests uttered, but these brethren are tangled up in hopeless contradictions of their own teaching. They approve some church sponsored social activities and disapprove others, accept some institutional schemes and attack others. They are the rear-guard of the institutional camp. They help to keep people in that camp who otherwise might be shocked enough to leave.

The ultra-liberalism which became pronounced in the 1880s-90s resulted in the formation of the North American Christian Convention during 1926-27 as a forum for the moderates, and formal division occurred with the liberals’ Restructure movement in 1968. Our moderates today speak more and more of “a growing chasm in our beloved brotherhood” (Contending for the Faith, Feb. 1985, p. 13) and “the threat of yet another division” (Gospel Advocate, 16 May 1985, p. 299). When and how remain to be seen. Meanwhile, let us labor to save as many as we can.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 22, pp. 685-686
November 21, 1985

By Mike Willis

Recently I watched a thirty-minute Jimmy Swaggert broadcast. Swaggert preached a typical Pentecostal sermon in which he stated that anyone who had not received the baptism of the Holy Spirit had not been born again and was lost. In trying to persuade people to accept what he was preaching, he described the typical person who becomes dissatisfied with his religion and finds answers in Pentecostalism. Such a person goes to a church which is dead and unemotional; the members sleep through the services; the singing is dragged to death; the services are dull and boring. The spiritual needs of the members are not met. They begin to look elsewhere and are attracted to Pentecostalism.

Pentecostalism is a false religion. Its doctrines are not found in the word of God. Its emphasis on subjective emotionalism as a testimony of salvation (“I know I am saved because I feel so good”) establishes man as the standard of authority rather than God.

However, I am afraid that we are preparing the soil for the planting of sectarian Pentecostalism by some of the things which are happening in many churches among us. We need to feed the souls of men. That means that the gospel involves that which satisfies the mind, the heart, the soul, and the strength of man. Sometimes our services do not leave men satisfied because part of man’s nature remains unnourished. Because these needs are not met, members of the church look with longing eyes into Pentecostalism or other forms of sectarian denominationalism.

Things Which Cause Members To Look Somewhere Else

I would like to suggest some things which might cause members to look somewhere else to find spiritual satisfaction. Perhaps my observations are too subjective and others would disagree with them. These are but one man’s expression of concern.

1. Lifeless members. Many assemblies are attended by corpses the body is present but the spirit is somewhere else. You can perceive this because of the glaring look in the eyes. While the sermon is being preached, these members sit in a daze with their minds somewhere else. They drag themselves to services, frequently just once a week, and have little or no commitment to what is being done in the congregation.

2. Unemotional services. The services in many congregations leave one emotionally drained; they do not build up the Christian so that he will convert someone to Christ.

I have not attended a congregation in the last decade where one freely said “Amen” when he heard something in the sermon with which he agreed. We have created an atmosphere in our worship where the audience is observing rather than participating in the sermon. The result is that preaching is viewed as a performance by many rather than something designed to bring about change in life.

The sermons themselves are sometimes dry. Sometimes a sermon from an outline book is lifted on Saturday night and a canned lesson is presented. Without having applied himself to the lesson the preacher does not touch the hearts of those in attendance. Too many preachers have become lecturers who present the facts without the least indication that their hearts are touched by the facts. One does not see a burning fire within them which must speak because of their deep convictions. There is no urgency to act upon what is preached. The pulpit is dry which never has a preacher who emphatically makes his point and calls on the audience to respond to what has been preached.

Sometimes the matters are made even worse by preachers who preach their doubts rather than what they know. Such sermons leave the audience in a state of doubt and uncertainty. We have not been sent by God to preach our doubts; we have been sent to preach the Gospel – the Lord’s good news.

The prayers sometimes have little input from the one leading them. A standard prayer using repeated phrases such as the following is prayed:

“We pray for the sick the world over and especially of the household of faith.”

“Give the preacher a ready recollection of the things which he has prepared.”

“Be with us as we go to our places of abode.”

I am not trying to poke fun at anyone who leads prayer; I do not want to discourage any young Christian from growing in this area. Each of the things mentioned is a legitimate thing to pray about and can be expressed in the very words cited. However, our prayers need to reflect the intensity of our feelings on various subjects. They need to be the outpouring of our hearts to God. Sometimes I get the impression that we have a ritualistic prayer that we say rather than opening and baring our souls before God.

The singing is sometimes laborious. Everybody who thinks he can sing is encouraged to lead singing. I recognize that we need to develop talents and do not want to discourage anyone who is trying to improve himself in this area. However, the overall impact of the worship on the local church must also be considered. Song leaders who consistently pitch the songs so low no one can sing, who drag the songs, who never try to introduce new songs to the church, and who give no thought to what they are going to lead until they get to the building make this part of our worship uninspiring. Members who will not sing also discourage us during worship. Some never open a book and others who open a book never open their mouths. The singing in many churches is discouraging, not inspiring.

The Lord’s supper is commemorated with little emotion. In many congregations practically nothing is said before the emblems are passed. If something is said, it generally pertains to Bible authority to take the Lord’s supper every first day of the week. Surely our hearts would be better prepared to commemorate the death of the Lord if the man presiding at the table would remind us of Jesus’ love for us, the agonies of His death, His example, and other aspects of Jesus’ life to call our hearts back to Calvary.

The announcements sometimes leave a lot to be desired. ,An announcement of the birth of a new child and the death of an aged saint are sometimes made with no distinction in emotion; the man making the announcements is stoical. Surely these areas can be improved.

3. Lack of growth. Many churches are not growing. In some areas, we are actually losing members instead of gaining them. I recognize that not all spiritual growth is numerical and sometimes no baptisms occur despite the genuine efforts of consecrated Christians. However, too many churches are not growing because they are not working. Few home Bible studies are in progress; few efforts to reach those in the world are being made. We have contented ourselves with two meetings a year, a church bulletin which is generally circulated among faithful Christians throughout the United States, a radio program, and Bible classes. Consecrated efforts to make contact with and teach non-Christians are rare.

4. Internal fussing and bickering. In addition to lack of growth, the local church is frequently troubled by internal fighting. Gossip, slander, whispering, jealousy, envy, and such like works of the flesh are all too common. In some congregations, the preacher is the chief culprit. Those who cross the preacher can be guaranteed that their reputations will be attacked and assaulted. Some preachers are known for sticking their noses in other people’s business and then writing letters all over the country to maliciously destroy another’s reputation. Perhaps the adage, “A kicking mule cannot plow and a plowing mule cannot kick,” is especially applicable at this point. Churches which are busy working have fewer problems than those which are doing nothing. Who has not been discouraged by these kinds of internal problems?

These problems create a feeling of dissatisfaction among members. Who should be satisfied when these problems exist? These are the things which prepare the hearts of men for the reception of sectarianism.

The Solution

Is sectarianism the solution? Absolutely not. Teaching the false doctrines of sectarianism will not solve the problems of the works of the flesh, the spiritual deadness in some members, and any other problem. One’s problems will only be increased by adding the burden of false doctrines!

The solution is a revival. We must bring those dead members back to life through repentance; we must rekindle the smoking flame of some members who are nearly dead. Our zeal must be awakened.

Members are going to have to start thinking more about God and less about sports, television, material possessions, fashions, and any other thing which is rooting out God. Members are going to have to give more time to prayer, Bible study, serving their fellow man, and other works. When these things begin to occur, there will be an excitement and zeal about the worship and work of the local church. Let each of us work and pray for this spiritual revival.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 23, pp. 706, 726
December 5, 1985