Truth Magazine

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare an not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to obedience of Christ, and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience Is fulfilled (2 Cor. 10:3-6).

We Are At War

When one becomes a Christian, he declares war on the forces of Satan. He wants to be able to say, “I have fought a good fight” (2 Tim. 4:7). He struggles with his own fleshly weaknesses to keep doing what he believes to be right. He has fights against systems of thought that make one feel justified in doing wrong. He must expose these systems for his own benefit and for the benefit of those whom he is trying to teach. I like to be positive in my teaching and preaching (oral and written), but I can’t always be. There are thoughts that must be “cast down” and “pulled down” before we can “bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.”

There is no place in the Lord’s army for cowards; the “cowardly” will be in hell (Rev. 21:8). But, carnal minds have warped views of things. Carnal-mindedness, characteristic of spiritual immaturity, had been a long standing problem at Corinth (cf. 1 Cor. 3:3). They had a carnal view of strength and weakness — courage and cowardice. Paul deals with this in our text. His opponents measured strength by outward or fleshly appearance (v. 7) and so influenced the Corinthians. In effect, they accused him of being a weakly coward — one who talked big away from them, but would fold up with timidity when face to face (v. 10). He ironically identifies himself to them as the one “who in presence am lowly among you, but being absent am bold toward you.” If that had really been so, then he would have fought after the flesh, making bold statements against sin from a distance, but melting when having to face them close up. It is easier to be bold from safety of distance or even from behind a curtain of anonymity than to look the accused in the eye. Such is beneath the dignity of those who war after the Spirit and characteristic of those who war after the flesh.

As the immature carnal minds often do, they also mistook longsuffering for weakness. They said, in effect, “If Paul is strong and we are wrong, why does he not do something about it?” Paul was “ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.” (The only punishment that I know that Paul had a right to give would be that of “deliver(ing) one unto Satan”– cf. 1 Cor. 5:5; 2 Cor. 2.6; 1 Tim. 1:20.) Those who “war according to the flesh” are quick to issue an ultimatum to the opposition, demand immediate compliance, or face immediate consequences. They see any other course as being weak-either unable or unwilling to take action. Delay did not mean weakness. Paul could and would act in due time, but he had good reason for delay-to give those who could be salvaged opportunity to “fulfill their obedience” (v. 6). He had the authority. But, it was “for building you up, and not for casting you down” (v.8, ASV). He would use his authority to punish (or discipline) the disobedient (as had already been done in the case of the immoral man — 1 Cor. 5) when he came (v. 11), after he had salvaged those that could be persuaded to obey.

“Carnal Weapons”

“Carnal” weapons are used by those who “war according to the flesh.” In context, “carnal” likely refers to tactics used, rather than having reference to swords and the like. It is from sarkikos. “from sarx, flesh, signifies (a) having the nature of the flesh, i.e., sensual, controlled by animal appetites, governed by human nature, instead of by the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 3:3; having its seat in the animal nature, or excited by it. I Pet. 2:11, ‘fleshly;’ or as the equivalent of ‘human,’ with the added idea of weakness, figuratively of the weapons of spiritual warfare, ‘of the flesh’ (A.V. ‘carnal’), 2 Cor. 10:4; or with the idea of unspirituality, of human wisdom, ‘fleshly,’ 2 Cor. 1:12” (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, W.E. Vine).

Those who “war after the flesh” use various fleshly devices to win a commitment to their side. Misrepresentation, gossip, slander, cheap verbal shots, intimidation, innuendo, flattery, sophistry, overstatement, officious meddling, prejudicial statements, base appeals to the fleshly side (fear, passion and pride), careful concealment of real cost of commitment, may be powerful weapons-but they better serve the purposes of those who war after the flesh than the Lord’s church.

In earthly conflicts, men may say, “My country, right or wrong, still my country”-so, the country’s position must be defendedright or wrong. Such a partisan spirit can be found in the church. Brethren can be more interested in preserving “our position,” maintaining a “united front” and forcing folks to get in step with that, rather than searching for, defending and propagating truth and bringing people intofthe with Christ. This, too, is warring after the fiesh. Yet, one has to watch that he does not let fleshly pride of independence,the desire to show that “he is his own man,” to govern his spiritual warfare. He may abandon good scriptural reasoning that has proven to be sound over the years because he does not want to appear to parrot “the party line” or “church of Christ position.” He wants all, especially the brotherhood, to know that he is not one of those weaklings who cannot think for himself. He wars after the flesh just as much as the man who blindly follows a “brotherhood tradition.”

We should not use carnal tactics because: (1) they are not right, (2) they do not work, (3) they are counter-productive to our goal, and (4) we have a more powerful and effective weapon — in the persuasive power of truth openly and simply presented.

The Strongest Weapons Of All

Paul said the “weapons of our warfare” are “mighty in God.” He did not need fleshly tactics to gain advantage over opposition; he had the advantage in the persuasive power of the gospel with its ability to “pull down strongholds, cast down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God.” There is no stronger way of stopping the mouths of those who “teach things that they ought not” than “by sound doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers” (Tit. 1:9-11). This is hard for the immature, carnal mind in the church to understand.

The mature Christian chooses weapons carefully. He understands “he is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules” (2 Tim. 2:5). He knows that he must “walk in the flesh,” while resisting the ever-present temptation to “war after the flesh.” This is not easy, because fleshly means often seem more direct and faster in getting at sin. If the opposition uses such means against us, why should we not be allowed to use the same weapons in a good cause? So, sincere and zealous, but immature brethren often find what appears to be the quickest and most direct attack on the problem of internal sin and error very attractive — without stopping to consider whether or not the “weapon” is the kind a Christian ought to use. The fact that one’s objective is righteous does not justify trying to achieve it by unrighteous means.

I would like to wipe out abortion. I believe the Scriptures condemn it. But, bombing abortion clinics and/or harassing their patrons are not “weapons” that 1, as a Christian, have at my disposal.

I would like to see every mechanical instrument of music removed from the buildings of those professing Christianity. But, I cannot recommend the methods of a good sister in Kentucky that I read about. In the 1800s when one was brought into the building where she attended, she slipped in after dark and took a chopping axe to the thing!

I would like to see all religious error and sinful conduct removed from the church. I believe I must keep fighting to that end (cf. Jude 3; Heb. 12:3,4). But, I must be careful that I do not allow my hatred for sin — and I must abhor sin — to provoke me into methods that more befit Satan’s army than the Lord’s.

What Are We Trying To Do?

The best way in the world to wipe out sin and error is to make faithful Christians of those who are caught up in it. That is the first objective of the faithful spiritual warrior.

The objective of our warfare is “bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” It is changing the thinking of people by “casting down arguments” of error with good scriptural answers. Carnal tactics may change outward behavior, but they will not bring one’s thinking into harmony with the will of Christ. If we cannot persuade those who may be wrong that they are not obeying Christ and that what we present is the will of Christ that they must obey, we need not try other tactics. Even if we succeed in changing behavior, we will not really have changed any convictions. One would not be acting for sound reasons.

Carnal tactics work against us in that they are repulsive to many fair-minded people of this world. They see the “carnal weapons” used in the name of Christ for what they are and become prejudiced against genuine Christianity. In their minds such tactics are a part of our religion. If they are going to reject the gospel, let us do all we can to see that they are rejecting it for what it really is-rather than what we may have misrepresented it to be. Further, it may pressure one into acting in harmony with truth without really being convicted of the truth-thus producing, at best, a half-baked Christian; at worst, a hypocrite. Also, reaction to carnal means (especially those designed to intimidate) often harden the very ones we are trying to change. If people are going to be hardened (and some will be) we want it to be a reaction to the truth handled aright and not some carnal tactic we may have used in the name of Christ.

Carnal weapons often get more immediate and visible results with less effort. It may take longer to change a person’s attitude and thinking about spiritual matters by rooting out his errors and replacing them with truth through the teaching and learning process. Then there is the time and effort to learn what the Scriptures teach well enough to “reason with (those in error) from the Scriptures” (cf. Acts 17:2). Because of this we are tempted to go the shortest route to get action-carnal means of persuasion (cf. 1 Cor. 2:4). It takes less effort to go directly to man’s fleshly side-to try to entice, excite, shame, or scare him into line by carnal means than it does to persuade him by taking Bible in hand and reasoning him into obedience to Christ. One of the dangers of impatience is that of trying to force the desired results by undesirable means. It matters not whether it is carnal means of enticement, excitement, or coercion. It is still a carnal weapon that should be abandoned by the Christian in favor of the most powerful weapon of all — the truth of the gospel boldly or confidently presented (v. 2; Eph. 6:19,20).

Lest someone think that we are saying that fear, shame, and/or other emotions have no part in the Christian’s arsenal; maybe we need to say more.

The gospel produces its own enticement, fear, shame, and excitement. We do not have to help it out with those we can create or borrow from men-be they theologians, philosophers, orators, or salesmen. When one has been reasoned with from the Scriptures and convinced by the evidence of the nature of Christ, the extent of His love, what He expects us to do and the blessings of obedience that will entice and excite him to conform. When one is convinced of the truth about the wrath of God and the reality of hell, that will produce fear. When one is convinced of sin, its nature and consequences, that will produce shame.

Yes, there are right ways to produce fear and shame in our fight against sin. “Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest may fear” (1 Tim. 5:20). “And if anyone does not obey our word by this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed” (2 Thess. 3:14). But, these (rebuke and discipline) must be used in the framework of adequate scriptural teaching, reasoning, and persuasion or they will become nothing more than carnal weapons to bully brethren into line. We may by carnal means excite, entice, scare and/or shame one to get into step with us but we can never get him in step with Christ without “pulling down arguments” and teaching him so that his “every thought is brought into captivity to Christ.”

When we come to the end of our journey here, let it be said that we fought a good fight against sin rather than taking a “hear no evil, see no evil, speak (against) no evil stance that we observe in all too many in the church today. But, let us be able to say that we have “fought a good fight” — not just merely fought.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 13, pp. 392-393, 409
July 4, 1985

By Dennis C. Abernathy

Nothing is more hurtful and cancerous to a local church than to have a few members with a critical, carping and negative attitude. Such an attitude is infectious and a few “well-placed” gripes and criticisms sprinkled with several timely “innuendos” and “open-ended questions” can sour a church’s spirit and enthusiasms and turn a peaceful congregation into a contentious, bitter battleground.

The following suggestions are offered as we seek to evaluate our attitude toward the church with which we might work. A member’s relationship with local churches depends very much on attitude.

1. Examine Yourself. How do you talk to your brethren? What about outsiders? Are your comments positive, encouraging and edifying, or, do you spend your time criticizing the church and those who are trying to make right decisions and grappling with the problems the church may face, so that a peaceful and scriptural solution may be reached?

James says, “Do not grumble against one another, brethren, lest you be condemned” (Jas. 5:9). Peter says, “Be hospitable to one another without grumbling” (1 Pet. 4:9).

2. Concentrate On “Building Up” And Not On “Tearing Down. ” Are your remarks and comments offered to help the church grow, or, are they merely given out of envy, bitterness or malicious motives? We must exercise care to “let no corrupt communication proceed out of our mouth” but always to speak “what is good for necessary edification” that we “may impart grace to the hearers” (Eph. 4:29).

It is much easier to “tear down” than it is to “build up.” I am reminded of a little poem entitled “The Wrecking Crew,” which reads as follows:

I stood on the streets of a busy town,
Watching men tear a building down:
With a “Ho, heave, ho,” and a lusty yell,
They swung a beam and a sidewall fell.

I asked the foreman of the crew,
“Are those men as skilled as those you’d hire if you wanted to build?”
“Ah, no,” he said, “no indeed.”
Just common labor is all I need.

I can tear down as much in a day or two,
As would take skilled men a year to do.”
And then I thought as I went on my way,
Just which of these two roles am I trying to play?

Have I walked life’s road with care,
Measuring each deed with rule and square?
Or am I one of those who roam the town,
Content with the labor of tearing down?

3. Never Cut Down And Criticize Something Unless You Have A Solution Yourself And Are Willing To Work To Implement It! Anyone can criticize! The story is told of the man who said he was afraid he was going to be of no use in the world because he had only one talent. The preacher said, “Oh, that need not discourage you. What is your talent?” “The talent of criticism,” the man said. To this the preacher replied, “Well, I advise you to do with it what the man of one talent did with his. Criticism may be useful when mixed with other talents, but those whose only activity is to criticize the workers might as well be buried, talent and all.”

Some criticize decisions made by the leadership in the church. They criticize the business meetings, but never attend one to offer suggestions to help. Others criticize the teachers, but never volunteer to teach themselves. Not a few criticize the preacher, and all too often that is the sum total of their effort. I was once told that you don’t need to know much about preaching to be a preacher. Just start and a great many of the brethren will tell you how to do it!

Some criticism is needed and can be helpful, if it is the right kind and stemming from the proper attitude. William Penn said it well: “They have a right to censure who have a heart to help.

4. Go To Your Brethren if you have a complaint. Go to the person involved and talk to him as a Christian should. Don’t ever engage in gossip, backbiting, and whispering campaigns to others. Do your best to communicate your complaint to your brethren in the right way. Usually this will clear the air and take care of the problem unless there is some malicious intent or an ulterior motive involved. Brethren need to talk to one another as brethren!

5. Ask Yourself The Question, “If every member of the church here had my attitude, what would the church be accomplishing right now?” Attitude and disposition are so very important. They can build friendships or make enemies. Jack Hyles said, “I want to be willing to make enemies because of my position but not because of my disposition.”

6. If You Disagree with a specific program of work or activity the church is engaged in on “scriptural” grounds (not just personal opinion or through stubbornness), go to the leaders of the church and discuss it with them. If it is wrong, the church needs to stop it I But first they must know it is wrong. If it is a matter of judgment, maybe a solution can be reached with all examining all sides. But above all, don’t undermine the work of the church, the elders, and the preacher by complaining and accusing, behind the back. Not only is this sinful, but it is cowardly!

Attitude! How important it is. Examine yours, my friend and brother. May I examine mine. Is your attitude helping the church or hurting it? Think about it.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 13, pp. 397, 409
July 4, 1985

By Dusty Owens

The Scriptures have much to say about my relationship with an erring brother, what my responsibilities are toward him, and what my attitude and disposition must be at all times. My brother may be wrong morally or doctrinally, but no matter, I have been given a definite way of dealing with him, prescribed by God in His word.

Too many times problems occur between brethren because an extreme or radical position is taken. One extreme is to ignore all error in hopes that the problem will go away. Perhaps this was the thinking of the Corinthian brethren in I Corinthians 5. Tolerating persistent and flagrant sinning among God’s people is against the will of God. “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out the old lump, even as ye are unleavened” (vv. 6-7).

The opposite extreme, and one that I judge to be radical, is to consider everyone in error, morally or doctrinally, that does not believe exactly as I do on all issues. Certainly, I have a responsibility before God to study intently all Scriptures that deal with every major issue before us, and to reach some kind of conclusion if I can. But, it just may well be that over some highly controversial issue that brethren have argued over for decades (or centuries), I am still undecided. I should not be stampeded, threatened or cajoled into “lining up” with one faction or another. I should not be deemed 44suspect,” or “unsound” because I am studying conscientiously. Also, I should be able to ask questions of those I consider more experienced and wiser without setting off a ripple of gossip and slander as to my “soundness” or faithfulness to the Lord. If I expect brethren to treat me with love and compassion, even in controversy, then should I not be willing to treat my brethren the same way?

A Man Overtaken In Trespass

We all “sin and fall short of the glory of God,” but occasionally, a brother will be overtaken by a specific sin for which he has a weakness. He does not intend to do wrong, but it happens. Furthermore, he continues to attend services, as he should! Too many times, as brethren find out about the sin of the weak brother, there is discussion in whispered hushes about him, instead of a sincere effort on the part of a spiritual brother to go to him in a spirit of gentleness that he might be helped and restored back to the faith. There seems to be far too much apathy and disinterest on our part. Is this a sign that there is no “spiritual one” among us (Gal. 6:1-3)?

We should be impressed with the kind of attitude or disposition of heart expected of us by God in our dealings with those we are trying to help. When we go to another who needs our teaching and exhorting, it must not be with a spirit of arrogance and superiority, a holier-than-thou display. If we are truly “spiritual,” we will go to another in love, peace, kindness, longsuffering, goodness, meekness, self-control and gentleness (Gal. 5:22-23).

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 13, p. 396
July 4, 1985

By Don R. Hastings

My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons

Don’t Try To Be A Follower Of Christ And Show Partiality And Favoritism

You cannot be a true disciple of Christ and be a respecter of persons because Christ dealt with all people fairly and without partiality (Mt. 22:16; Lk. 20:21). Jesus taught Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews (Jn. 3:1). Jesus, also, taught a Samaritan woman (Jn. 4:7-26). Jesus ate with publicans and sinners (Mt. 9:10-13).

The heavenly Father “is no respecter of persons” (Rom. 2:11). It took a vision and the Holy Spirit sending Peter to the household of Cornelius before he realized “that God is no respecter of persons” and neither should he be (Acts 10:34,35). How can we claim to be faithful children of God and yet show a respect of persons?

We should not refuse friendship with a good person because: his skin color is different; he doesn’t live in a nice house; he doesn’t wear the latest fashions; he is poorly educated; he is not popular with the “in crowd”; etc. We should refuse close friendship with those who are trying to get us to do sinful things (Prov. 22:24; 1 Cor. 15:33)!

An Example Of How To Be Guilty Of Showing Partiality

Christians can show partiality in the worship assembly. The Greek word which is translated “synagogue” could also, be translated “assembly” (see footnote in ASV in Jas. 2). “Vile clothing” refers to clothing worn by “a beggar” (Mt. 19:21), one dependent on the charity of others for his very livelihood. . .” (New Testament Commentaries James, by AGuy N. Woods, p. 108). The rich man is given a place of honor. The poor man is told to stand, which was an extreme discourtesy, or told contemptuously, “sit under my footstool.” They had become judges with evil thoughts because their partiality was motivated by selfishness (Jude 16). Being a friend of the rich meant gaining prestige, and he might share with you some riches, but what could the poor man do for you? Moses told the judges of Israel not to “respect persons in judgment” (Deut. 1:16,17; 16:19; 10:17,18).

Do We Show Favoritism?

Preachers can show partiality by not preaching boldly on a particular sin because it would offend a prominent brother or sister. Elders can show favoritism by bringing disciplinary action on some sinful Christians, but not other sinful Christians. Brethren can form cliques so that they fail to speak to others. Do we show favoritism at home, work, school, etc.?

James points out that these Christians were dishonoring those who honored God and honoring those who dishonored themselves and God. The poor are more likely to become Christians because they don’t have riches to put their trust in (Mk. 10:23-35). It is far more important to be “rich in faith” and poor in material goods than be rich in material goods and poor in faith! The poor, who are “rich in faith,” have the promise of inheriting the kingdom in heaven-a far greater inheritance than the children of the rich (2 Pet. 1:10, 11). The rich speak against the holy name, “Christian” (Acts 11:26).

How To Keep From Being Guilty Of The Sin Of Respect Of Persons

“Fulfill the royal law . . . thou shalt love. . . “(Jas. 2). We are not to pick just certain neighbors to love and “look, down our noses” at all the rest. Jesus taught that everyone is our neighbor, whom we should love (Lk. 10:25-37). If we love our neighbor, we will not hurt him by discriminating against him. We know how it feels for others to be shown favoritism over us, and we must not make someone else feel that same pain (Mt. 7:12).

If a person violates any of God’s laws, he is a sinner and stands condemned unless he obtains forgiveness. The law is like one big piece of glass-break one piece and you have broken the whole thing. A person who would violate one law of God would violate another law if that law displeased him. A person is a criminal if he only breaks one law. I like the way Guy N. Woods put it, “God’s will must be obeyed, not because it commends itself to our sense of what is right and proper, but because it is God’s will!”

We shall all be judged, impartially, by a “law of liberty, ” which sets us free from the bondage of sin (1 Pet. 1:17; Jas. 1:25). None will escape judgment. All will be judged fairly with no respect of persons.

Which one of these two men described in our text would Since we will all need greatly the mercy of God in the you want to sit by you? Would you feel uneasy sitting by judgment, let us show mercy to others now (Mt. 5:7; black Christians? A congregation where I preached had 25:34-35). Mercy is compassionate treatment to those in at one time barred the door of the building so blacks could distress-whether friend or foe, rich or poor, black or not enter. Would you teach the Bible to black people? Do white or red, etc. If we show compassion for all men, we you invite all races to come and worship with you? will not be a respecter of persons.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 13, p. 395
July 4, 1985