Truth Magazine

By Ramon Madrigal

Most Christians realize that the first century church experienced tremendous growth both in numbers and in spirit. Indeed, about 3000 repentant sinners were converted in response to the very first gospel sermon. What we often overlook is that this notable increase occurred under very hostile circumstances. Perhaps the presentation of a television miniseries like “A.D.,” aired last spring, helped graphically illustrate the problems and dilemmas our early brethren had to face. While much of the material in that movie was inaccurate and speculative, the Christians were, indeed, “fed to the lions” and treated cruelly. It was under such circumstances that the Apostle John wrote the book of Revelation and admonished his brethren to be “faithful unto death” (Rev. 2:10). Stephen was the first martyr, but certainly not the last (Acts 7).

So how is it in modern times that many churches seem “dead” spiritually and show little growth? We enjoy relative religious freedom and little governmental persecution at the present time. If the kingdom was able to grow in the first century within a belligerent environment, should not the modern church abound in growth and maturity?

Let me suggest to you that affluence and prosperity present special problems and trials to contemporary Christians. People who enjoy good health, a stable economy, and untold luxuries and leisure have a tendency to forget about God! Who needs the Lord when everything is going so well? The lesson of early Christianity is unmistakable: Growth is a product of dependence on God. This is why Jesus taught that the “poor in spirit are blessed” (Matt. 5:3). We need to humble ourselves before God and before our fellow-man. We ought to entrust to God our lives, expressing our humility and dependence to our Maker. Every Christian can do this in the following ways:

(1) Prayer. I suppose that there is no act or event that so vividly expresses our humility and lowliness as prayer. Yet this is our avenue of communication to God. Through prayer we can come boldly before the throne of grace and discuss life with our Lord. He will give us the strength and stamina we need to carry our crosses. How else could Paul and Silas endure the prison of Philippi?

(2) Singing. It is written that “as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.” Perhaps there is nothing as powerful to stimulate and motivate the mind as music. That is why the advertising industry uses musical “jingles” to sell products. That is how a lustful and sinful world sells a lascivious lifestyle to young and nimble minds. On the other hand, it is also how Christians can keep their thoughts on honorable, just, pure, and lovely things. Why not begin each day with a spiritual song? Like certain culinary foods, it is likely to “repeat” all day in your heart!

(3) Study. The Psalmist declared that he meditated on God’s law both day and night. So must we! The most effective way to eliminate evil and corrupt thoughts and desires from our minds is to fill and refill our minds with “things that are higher” and “things that are nobler.” Study also prepares us for the most important work of communicating our faith to others who “see our good works and glorify God” (Matt. 5:16). How else can we be ready to give answer to those who ask us to explain our hope (1 Pet. 3:15)?

(4) Sharing. By this we mean the deliberate and conscious effort to evangelize a lost and dying humanity. All have fallen short of God’s grace and stand condemned before God without Christ. Do you know of a friend, relative, or neighbor who needs the blood of the Lamb? Of course you do. Share your faith with him or her! Invite them to the services of the church; write a letter or send a tract; make that phone call and express your love and concern. We can do all things “through Christ who gives us strength” (Phil. 4:13).

While each of these items can be expressed in our assemblies together, I believe that the greatest growth is accomplished “behind the scenes.” Personal growth is primary and preparatory to church growth. Constant and fervent prayer “in our closets” shows God (and no one else) that we are aware of our need for Him. While our co-workers may sing along with Kenny Rogers or Juice Newton, we should sing spiritual songs and hymns to the glory of God. Who knows, maybe we’ll actually influence somebody for good rather than being influenced by evil. Although it may be relaxing and entertaining to watch 3-6 hours of television each night, can we not find 10-30 minutes to meditate on the Word? Can we not scrape together 20 minutes to regularly share our faith to others in some way?

These are things that we all can do, whatever talents and abilities God has given to us. The preacher cannot pray or sing for you. That is your responsibility both in and out of the church building. Neither can the elders study and evangelize for me. That is my responsibility and opportunity. May God give us the wisdom to recognize our utter dependence on Him, the courage and confidence to continue in the faith, and the zeal to evangelize the world!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 18, pp. 545, 566
September 19, 1985

By Dennis C. Abernathy

The apostle Paul tells the Ephesians that “there is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all” (Eph. 4:4-6). Just as surely as this passage shows there is but one God, it shows there is but one body. In other words, if you believe in one God, you also believe there is one body (that is, if you believe the Bible)!

Our Lord has but one body on this earth. “For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another” (Rom. 12:4-5). “But now are they many mem4ers, yet but one body” (1 Cor. 12:20).

Since we now know there is but one body, the next question is: “What is this one body?” Let the Book answer. “And He is the head of the body, the church . . .” (Col. 1: 18). Notice further, “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church” (Col. 1:24). One last passage, “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:22-23). The church is His body! “The body” — “the church.” How simple. But please notice that this does not say “a church … .. some church,” or “just any church.” But it does say “the church.” What does this prove? It proves there is but one body and this one body is the church. It follows then, that there is but one church!

This being the truth, why will men encourage people to “join the church of your choice and glorify God”? (Billy Graham, “My Answer,” 12/15/55).- May I ask a question in all sincerity, not to be ugly or offensive, but plain and forthright. How is it that there is a Catholic church, a Seventh-Day Adventist church, several different kinds of Baptist churches, Methodist churches, interdenominational churches that are composed of many different beliefs, and on and on we could go, yet with each of these claiming its existence by divine authority and all claiming to acknowledge the Bible as being true? Is the Bible the “infallible rule of faith and practice”? I can read of Paul addressing “the church of God at Corinth.” I can read of “the saints and faithful brethren in Christ who are at Colossae.” I can read of “the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons” (1 Cor. 1:2; Col. 1:2; Phil. 1:1). Then I can read of “all the churches of Christ” sending greetings (Rom. 16:16). But my dear friend, I must humbly confess that I have never found where Paul addressed the Presbyterian Church, the Baptist Church, or the Methodist Church. Have you? I cannot find anything like “the Seventh-day Adventist Churches salute you” in the Word of God. Can you? Have you wondered why this is so? Doesn’t it appear that something is wrong?

Ah! But someone says, “these organizations are but branches of the vine, or members of the one body of which Paul speaks. But when one defends error (or tries to) he finds himself engrossed in even more error. Now we have a “Baptist branch of the church,” a “Methodist branch of the church,” and I suppose the smaller, less prominent groups might be considered I ‘twigs. ” But notice, if you will. Until the various denominations came into being (whose beginnings are not found in the Bible), the church must have been without “branches” and consequently could not have been fruitful. A vine with no branches that bears no fruit is worthless! But we are supposed to believe that today God has branches, and branches, and branches, and branches. That there are branches of branches, and branches of branches of branches. Talk about “spiritual evolution.” And not only that, but all of these branches are growing from the same vine, with every one bearing different kinds of fruit. Talk about an oddity. My friend, who can believe it!

No, dear reader, there is but one body, the church. You can read all about it in the Bible. It is composed of the “saved,” who have been added to it by the Lord Himself (Acts 2:37,38,41,47). The units that make up the one body are Christians and not congregations or different denominations. These Christians form local churches when they meet together in their localities and do what God has ordained in His Word.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 17, p. 532
September 5, 1985

By Ronnie Milliner

We all enter God’s family at different times. We mature at different rates. How are those who are more mature or stronger in the faith to treat those who are weaker? How should the weak react to the strong? Paul deals with these relationships in Romans 14:1-15:13.

Not Damning (14:1-12)

Paul admonishes, “Receive the one who is weak in the faith” (14:1a). The realm in which Paul is dealing in this section of Scripture is the area of opinion (14:1b, NASB). This point is important to remember for some individuals want to apply the writer’s instruction to areas unauthorized by the Word of God.

Two examples are given-one in the matter of diet, the other in the matter of day-keeping. “One believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables” (14:2). In the other area, “one person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike” (14:5a). If a man chooses to eat only vegetables, he is not violating any sacred principle. The man is not to be condemned for his actions, neither is he to try to bind his personal view on other brethren.

The reason we are not to condemn our weaker brethren is that we are not the Master (14:1), we are not the Lord (14:7-9), we are not the Judge (14:10-12). “Each of us shall give account of himself to God” (14:2).

Not Deterring (14:13-23)

In dealing with our weaker brethren we should not “put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way” (14:13). A man should not be caused to violate his conscience, for if he does he is sinning (14:23). Can you imagine destroying one spiritually “with your food the one for whom Christ died” (14:15)? Is my food (or my “rights”) more important than my brother’s soul? Instead of demanding our way, “let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food” (14:19-20).

Not Dividing (15:1-13)

The stronger need to carry the weaker, not put them down. Build up, not tear down. Christ was certainly one who was not looking out for just self. He was willing to sacrifice Himself for others, and so should we. Even though there may be differences of knowledge due to different stages of maturity, we should still be one. “Be like-minded toward one another . . . that you may with one mind and one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (15:5-6). Never should God’s people divide over matters of indifference.

Conclusion

We are a family. Families have problems and differences, but they seek to resolve their problems. God, our Father, has told us, His children, how to handle our problems. We can settle any matter if we will follow His will. “Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, leading to edification”

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 18, p. 548
September 19, 1985

By Jack Holt

On May 20th and 21st, brother Bob LaCoste of the Wonsley Drive congregation in Austin Texas debated brother Bill Jackson of the Southwest congregation, also of Austin. The discussion was held one night in each building on the subject of church benevolence. Brother LaCoste affirmed: “The Scriptures teach that the church may grant benevolent aid only to those persons who are members of the church2′ Brother Jackson affirmed: “The Scriptures teach that the church may grant benevolent aid to a person who is not a member of the church.”

Brother LaCoste’s general demeanor was excellent, and his speeches dealt with the issues. Brother Jackson’s behavior was beneath that of a Christian gentleman in several particulars. His speeches were filled with language that could only serve to widen the gap between brethren, and in the last speech of the debate he introduced six new arguments and ridiculed brother Elmer Moore, who was brother LaCoste’s moderator, for making a point of order concerning the new material.

The first night of the debate was held at Wonsley with brother Jackson in the affirmative. The building was full (about 300 faithful brethren, and about 75 from Southwest). The second night of the discussion (at Southwest) found about 250 of our brethren in attendance, and less than 100 from Southwest-this in spite of the fact that Southwest boasts a normal attendance of near 350.

The truth prevailed in an outstanding fashion during the debate. In his first speech, brother Jackson charged that brother LaCoste believed that we must have specific authority for everything that we do. Brother LaCoste corrected brother Jackson on this, but brother Jackson continued to make the charge throughout the debate. In the course of making this charge, brother Jackson continually attempted to identify brother LaCoste with the anti-class, anti-located preacher, and anti-women teacher movements.

In his first negative, brother LaCoste took 2 Corinthians 9:13 away from brother Jackson so effectively that brother Jackson did not dare mention it again until the final speech of the debate. Brother LaCoste showed that pantas (“all”) could not have reference to alien sinners in the context of that passage.

Of course, brother Jackson brought out several passages which described individual duties in benevolence, and tried to apply them to church benevolence. Brother LaCoste demonstrated from 1 Timothy 5:16 that God has made a distinction between the benevolent duties of individuals versus the benevolent duties of the churches. All brother Jackson could do, again, was wait until his final speech when Bob would have no chance to answer, and then ridicule the idea that there was

any distinction between individual and collective duties in benevolence.

When brother Jackson brought up Galatians 6:10, he charged that brother LaCoste was inconsistent to contend that the verse spoke of individual action only, since he authorized collective action in regard to paying the preacher from Galatians 6:6. Brother LaCoste pointed out that he didn’t even believe Galatians 6:6 was talking about the preacher’s salary. He further explained that he looks to passages like 1 Corinthians 9:3-18; 2 Corinthians 11:8; and Philippians 4:10-20 to authorize a church paying his salary, and not Galatians 6:6. But apparently brother Jackson did not hear him, for even in his review of the debate (published June 20, 1985, Gospel Advocate), he charges brother LaCoste with looking to Galatians 6:6 to authorize the church paying his salary.

Brother Jackson spent the first 22 minutes of his first speech without even referring to a passage of Scripture. He argued from the basis of history that “antism” was wrong. Brother LaCoste simply pointed out that the proposition did not say, “History teaches that the church may grant benevolent aid to a person who is not a member of the church,” but that the proposition did say, “The Scriptures teach . . .” By referring to brother Jackson’s recent opposition to an Austin congregation’s building of a swimming pool, brother LaCoste got brother Jackson to admit that he was an “anti,” too.

On the other hand, brother LaCoste made a well-organized presentation of the truth while in the affirmative. After demonstrating the New Testament pattern in regard to whom the church may relieve, brother LaCoste pressed brother Jackson to see the parallel between his own position in regard to musical instruments in worship and the Bible’s pattern in church benevolence. Brother Jackson never dealt with the argument.

I could go on, but I think you get the general idea. I sure will be glad when brother Jackson and his brethren decide to come on out and defend their position from the Scriptures. Brother Jackson certainly did not do so in this debate.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 17, p. 524
September 5, 1985