Truth Magazine

By Lloyd Nash

“The due order” . . . this phrase was uttered by David, one of God’s great servants. Let’s look at this statement and see what brought it on. David thought it good to bring up the ark of God again. He failed the first time because he sought it not after the due order. Although David was the second king of Israel, and a man after God’s own heart, he still had to follow God’s order.

In 1 Chronicles 13:1-3a:

And David consulted with the captains of thousands and hundreds, and with every leader. And he said unto all the congregations of Israel, It if seem good unto you, and that it be of the Lord our God, let us send abroad unto our brethren everywhere, that are left in all the land of Israel, and with them also to the priests and Levites which are in their cities and suburbs, that they may gather themselves unto us: and let us bring agin the ark of God to us.”

They all agreed. It seems that they had not had access to the ark of God for a long time. So, David and all of Israel went up to Baalah; that is, to Kirjathjearim, to bring up the ark, and they carried it on a new cart (1 Chron. 13:1-7; 2 Sam. 6:30).

They all seemed to be very happy. But, this disobedience caught up with David. Uzzah lost his life because he put forth his hand to the ark. David knew who was to carry the ark: Kohath Levites. He also knew how it was to be carried: on their shoulders. This he knew all along. We can’t say that the Levites were not there, for we can see that they were. The second time David made preparation to bring up the ark, he did it in accord with the due order. He said none ought to carry the ark, but the Levites – for them God had chosen. He told them why he failed the first time. So, when he followed God’s plan, his joys were not turned to sadness.

Paul tells us, “for whatsoever things were written afore time were written for our learning.” So, being Christians, we should follow the Lord’s order in worship. This includes singing without mechanical instruments of music. Some say they don’t see anything wrong with musical instruments. David didn’t see anything wrong with carrying the ark of God on a new cart. But, God did (Rom. 15:4; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).

As members of the church of Christ, we must follow the due order. We preach Jesus Christ and Him crucified; one Lord, one faith, one baptism. We preach one gospel, and anything more than this is out of order. We pray. Paul said, “I will that men pray everywhere.” We pray as did our Lord that we all be one. We give as we prosper in accord with the order. This does not authorize pie and barbecue selling (1 Cor. 2:2; Eph. 4:5; Gal. 1:6, 8, 9; 1 Tim. 2:8; Jn. 17:21; 1 Cor. 16:1-2).

As Christians, we try to reach sinners so we can teach them about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. This with the hope that it will produce faith which will lead to repentance, confession of Christ, and then baptism for the remission of sins. Following the example of early Christians, we do not sprinkle sinners, baptize babies, or pour water on their heads. If we do these things, we would not be following the due order, for the act of baptism is a burial (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Acts 15:7; Heb. 11:6; Mk. 2:7; Acts 2:38; Matt. 10:32; Rom. 10:9-10; Mk. 16:15-16; Rom. 6:1-4).

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 11, p. 339
June 6, 1985

By Leslie Diestelkamp

For several years brother Mike Willis and I have corresponded regarding our differing convictions on the subject of continuous forgiveness for the faithful Christian. Repeatedly he has asked me to write an affirmative on this subject. For several reasons that do not need to be identified here, I have hesitated to do so, but my reluctance to do so was not at all to avoid making my conclusions known. In fact, in the last four years I have preached in about 53 meetings in 17 states, and in almost every one I have preached at least once on “Grace,” including some expressions about continuous forgiveness. Likewise, in my own publication (Think) I have occasionally written on these matters. So, you see, I have not avoided the subject.

Now I have decided to comply with brother Mike’s request to express my convictions in Guardian of Truth for these reasons: (1) I want to “set the record straight” with his readers, and (2) I want his readers to realize that Mike’s view is not a prevalent one. (Note: His “Letters” column in GOT does show that some agree with him, but I am convinced that 90% of brethren do not so agree. They don’t write to him, they write to me and to others who differ with Mike. In all of those 53 meetings mentioned above only three men have stated a disagreement with what I preached.)

My Affirmation

1. I affirm that the Scriptures teach that a child of God who lives in sin — who continues in the practice of sin — who walks after the flesh and not after the Spirit — will receive no forgiveness as long as he continues thus (Rom. 6:1,2; 8: 1; Gal. 5:19-21; Rev. 21:8). Such a person is not a faithful Christian, and I find no way to offer hope for him in that condition.

2. I affirm that a faithful Christian — one who “walks in the fight” (1 Jn. 1:7) and who “walks not after the flesh but after the Spirit” (Rom. 8:1-4) does indeed sin even while he is faithful. Understand, his sin is not an act of faithfulness and God does not approve of it, but his life is a life of faithfulness and God does approve of it. How can God approve of a life in which there is a sin? He forgives and then does not reckon that sin against the faithful one (see. Rom. 4:7, 8). John says, “If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves” (1 Jn. 1:8), but of the same ones John says, “My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (Jn. 2: 1). Yes, we do sin and 99.44% of the readers of this article will admit it. But we don’t live sinful lives — we don’t continue in sin — and we don’t cease to have the favor of a merciful God — and most of our readers agree with that statement also!

3. I affirm that forgiveness for the faithful Christian is altogether conditioned upon: (a) forgiving others (Mt. 6:12,13); (b) confessing sin even confessing sins of which we are unaware (Lk. 18:13; Psa. 19:12); (c) repentance and prayer (Acts 8:22). There is no hope for the child of God who will not forgive others, nor for the one who will not confess and pray as did the publican, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner” and as did David, “Cleanse thou me from secret faults.”

4. I affirm that (a) continuous cleansing is an absolute necessity for the faithful Christian because he does sin and even may be unaware of some of his sins; (b) continuous cleansing for the faithful Christian is a genuine reality because God has promised that, through the blood of Jesus, we have full forgiveness as we walk in the light; (c) continuous cleansing for the faithful Christian is without any satisfactory alternative because if such is not so, then there is no hope at all for any of us. If the blood of Christ does not keep us cleansed (while we walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit), then unless we die with a prayer upon our lips we may indeed die lost, and every hour of every day and night would be a day and an hour of misery and fear.

Summary

Remember, what I affirm has nothing to do with the alien — he has no relationship with God (Rom. 6:23); he has no mediator until he obeys Christ (Rom. 6:17,18; 2 Tim. 2: 10). Remember, also, what I affirm provides no hope for the unfaithful child of God unless he turns from his unfaithfulness, for “if we sin willfully” and if we trod under foot the Son of God, there is nothing but vengeance in store for us (Heb. 10:26-29). Indeed, “if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world” through Christ and “are again entangled therein, the latter end is worse than the beginning” (2 Pet. 2:20).

But remember, dear reader, there is consolation and hope for the humble, contrite child of God who resists evil and who draws near to God (Jas. 4:7,8). Our hope is not in merit of our own. Paul said that his desire and hope was that he “would be found in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith” (Phil. 3:9). Please, dear reader, do not ask me if you are good enough to go to heaven. I’ll disappoint you. I’ll have to say “No.” But you can go to heaven, though you never earn it yourself, because of the goodness and love and mercy and grace of God. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8,9). Do you believe it? I do!

There is no automatic forgiveness, no unconditional salvation. And there is no security apart from faithfulness. But, totally by grace God did provide a way of salvation, by genuine faith we accept that free gift of God-which we receive at obedience and which we retain by faithfulness. “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23).

Coming Next

If you are reading this in Guardian of Truth, then it means that brother Willis has agreed to also publish in the next issue a “Necessary Negative.” Look for it.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 11, pp. 336, 338
June 6, 1985

By Leslie Diestelkamp

It had been just over eleven years since I had visited Nigeria, and this 21st day of January 1985 was to bring to me a rather king and frustrating awareness of drastic change. The big cities in which I had lived and worked in former years are now so much larger — indeed, they are huge metropolitan areas now, with expressways and high-rise apartments, etc. The traffic, which we used to think was the world’s worse, is so much more congested now.

But the changes that thrilled me were in the churches. Twenty-five years ago we started from scratch in Lagos and now there are perhaps 33 congregations, some of them quite large. But numerical growth is not the whole story. All across the land-from the eastern border to the western boundary, churches are now very active in evangelizing other areas. They are now contributing large sums each week and are supporting many preachers, both in local work and in new fields. Twenty-five years ago, a congregation of 250 people may have given the equivalent of $10.00. Today they may give a sum equal to $400. Even eleven years ago, when I was last there, such contributions were unheard of, and almost no churches were able to support preachers.

A great middle-class has arisen in Nigeria. In former times there were the rich and the poor-mostly poor. But today there are many who are neither rich nor poor, but who do have some degree of prosperity.

Super-Inflation

Do you complain of inflation here in the U.S.? Just to give you a very few examples which represent almost everything, consider these prices we observed today in Nigeria (in U.S. dollars):

1 box of Ritz-type crackers: $ 4.00

One smallest can Baked Beans: 4.00

Kraft cheese slices (10): 5.50

Small Quaker Oats: 10.00

Tire (for mid-sized car): 500.00

I hope those churches that are supplementing wages for some native preachers will take note of this inflation. And remember, native foods and other necessities are proportionately costly.

Results Of Support

Throughout the years I have advised and recommended some American support for native preachers so that they could devote full-time to gospel work and not have to struggle every day for food and shelter for their families. A few Americans have not agreed with this policy, saying that the native churches should carry their own load. Today’s conditions proved the wisdom of supporting the preachers. Every church of which I am aware that now supports its, preachers and/or others in new fields is one that was nurtured by a preacher supported by Americans. Some churches seem no larger and no stronger than they were many years ago, and usually these are churches that have had to exist without a good, zealous preacher to teach, train and evangelize.

For instance in Lagos, most of the churches have,been started by other older churches and/or by zealous preachers who had time to devote to that kind of work because they were partly supported by American churches. The last church I started in 1961 and that I left in its infancy, is now a congregation of about 250 people (335 the Sunday morning I was there this time) and averages over $250 weekly contribution. They have started one or two new congregations and must do so again because they have outgrown their facilities. They can do this because they have a highly skilled membership, are trained in the Scripture, and are capable of giving up many members without destroying the old church.

Even in outlying areas-towns and small cities-growth and strength are evident in properly nurtured places. One church in a good town-a church that started 12 or 15 years ago-now has an attendance of around 500 and is supporting its own preacher and several others. Let me give you the budget for one church that is an old oneformerly rural but now engulfed in the expanding nearby town-and that had been big but not very active. Now, with proper teaching, they post the following budget (annual in U.S. dollars).

Preaching $6250.00

Poor and needy 1000.00

Bread & Fruit of the vine 607.00

Bibles, sons books, etc 750.00

Meetings, etc 1217.00

Building project 5000.00

Electric 625.00

Gen. expenses 2000.00

Total $17.449.00

Needs

Several worthy preachers need some supplemental support. Some good men need a few good books which they would gladly buy, but governmental restrictions that do not allow their money to be sent out, prevent them from purchasing the books. Such books will have to be sent to them by us. Some churches need song books and communion equipment, and for the same reason as given above, they cannot order them from overseas.

Conclusion

It was a real joy to be associated with my son Karl in this great work. Though I prefer to preach (than to listen), in this case and especially because of my chronic voice trouble, I was happy to sit and listen to Karl preach with such force and respond to their good questions with such clarity, at the same time demonstrating more patience than I can usually have. His attitude was indeed a manifestation of love for truth plus a genuine love for people. Karl preached about twice as much as I did, which is about the way we planned it. He told the people there that he had been commissioned by my family to keep me well (I think he meant that he should “bring me back alive”), and he did a good job of that. I told the people there that “I shall see your face no more” (see Acts 20:25), but I hope Karl can return in 2 or 3 years to carry forward the influence we have there.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 11, p. 334
June 6, 1985

By Frank Jamerson

Some contend that a person who has been baptized “because of remission of sins” has obeyed God, even though he did not understand the true purpose of baptism. They often ask, “Did you understand everything about baptism before you were baptized?” Their conclusion is that if you did not know everything about it, and yet obeyed God, then they could obey God without knowing the true purpose of it.

Before answering the basic error in this reasoning, let us ask some other questions. (1) Does a person have to understand the true action of baptism in order to obey God? Suppose one loves God and wants to obey Him, but has been taught that sprinkling is baptism. Is that acceptable? (2) Does a person have to be baptized for any purpose? Suppose he believes that baptism is not essential at all! If he does not have to do it for the right purpose, must he do it for some wrong purpose in order to please God? (3) Let’s go one step further. Suppose a person “loves God” and wants to obey him but does not believe that Jesus is the Son of God. Is there some reason that he must believe John 8:24, but does not have to believe Mark 16:16?

The basic thing wrong with the argument is that it does not distinguish between not knowing everything and obeying error. There is a vast difference between these two things. Must one know everything about the Divinity of Christ in order to believe in Him? If so, who can say that he truly believes in Jesus? The man who has been taught that Jesus was just a “good man, but not the Son of God,” has believed error. He has not believed in Christ! There is a difference between “perfect knowledge” of Christ and believing error about Him. The same is true of any other subject. One can obey the truth without knowing everything about it, but if he has been taught error, and obeys it, he has not obeyed truth.

In the apostolic age people were told the purpose of baptism before they were baptized (Acts 2:38; 22:16). There is no record of anyone being told to be sprinkled, or to be baptized because of remission of sins. They did not have to know all the arguments about why immersion was necessary in order to be immersed. They may not have known all the reasons why baptism was essential for salvation, but they were “baptized for the remission of sins.” Yes, one can obey truth without knowing everything about it, but if he has been taught error, and he obeys that, he has not obeyed truth!

We may be able to see the point more clearly by comparing baptism and the Lord’s supper. If a person observes the Lord’s supper because he “loves God,” but he has been taught that water can be used instead of the fruit of the vine (as the Mormons do), has he obeyed God? What if he observes it, using the right elements, but does it for the wrong purpose? (See 1 Cor. 11:23-29!) One who substitutes water for the fruit of the vine is making the same mistake as the one who substitutes sprinkling for immersion. One who observes the Lord’s supper for the wrong purpose is like the one who is baptized for the wrong purpose. Neither is obedience to God.

In the Bible, what did men do who had been baptized for the wrong purpose? In Acts 19:1-7, we read of about twelve men who had been baptized with John’s baptism. When they learned that John’s baptism, which had been in effect at one time, was no longer in effect, they were “baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” They did not say, I ‘Well, God knew that we were sincere, so He will credit the right purpose to what we did,” or “you did not know everything about baptism yourself, so the purpose of our baptism is not important. ” They changed, and obeyed the truth!

A person does not have to possess “perfect knowledge” to obey any truth, but there is a vast difference between that and obeying error. You cannot believe error and obey truth!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 12, pp. 355, 366
June 20, 1985