Truth Magazine

By Guthrie Dean

Surely, “to every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven. . . . a time of war, a time of peace” (Eccl. 3:1,8b). I was just wondering if there will ever be a time of peace again among the brethren. Back in the late 40s and during the 1950s, the gospel was going into the highways and hedges. Churches were growing, new congregations were springing up. Unity prevailed, and we seemed to have the devil and the denominations on the run. We were often spoken of “as the fastest growing religious communion in the United States..” Many did not agree with us, but there was a respect for the church of Christ in those days. And in some places there was even envy and fear at the phenomenal growth of the “Campbellites,” as our enemies used to call us.

Dr. Ben M. Bogard, the leader of the American Baptist Association, wrote a letter of warning to his fellow Baptists entitled, “The Campbellites Are Coming.” Churches of Christ in almost every hamlet were growing. In 1950 through 1954 the church at Judsonia, Arkansas, where I was preaching, moved up from 60 members to 215. The denominations were trembling at the thought of 32 such churches of Christ in White County Arkansas alone. We moved to Bald Knob, Arkansas, still in White County. The church grew in attendance from 65 to above 200. And even in the 1970s, the work in Fort Smith (at the Park Hill church) grew, as we worked together, from 135 to 200 in regular attendance, with the contribution growing about $200 per Sunday the last six months I worked there.

This was happening to many other churches everywhere. Brother Cecil Douthitt began preaching for the Southside church in Fort Smith (having retired from full-time preaching), and they grew to such an extent that on occasions chairs had to brought in to accommodate the audience. While Olin Kern was working with the South 46th Street church, also in Fort Smith, the work and attendance were flourishing. Brother Lloyd Nash was the preacher at No. 9th in Fort Smith. And the building was full every Sunday.

But today you can go into almost any congregation and see about as many empty pews as full ones. You see the saintly, gray-haired, old timers and some others of the faithful few at gospel meetings, or at any night service. The young people have left the church in droves. War, contention, fussing, fighting, taking sides, dividing, splitting-the-split, are the rule over the past decade among us. Shame, brethren. Shame on us. Oh, but the hard-nosed Pharisee will respond, “You know the Bible says we are not to say ‘Peace, peace; where there is no peace.’ See Jeremiah 6:14; 8: 11. And you know the Bible says, ‘many are called and few chosen . . . . and strait is the gate and narrow the way.'” Fiddle-sticks! What has that got to do with the jealous, hateful attitudes that we have acquired over the past few years? First we stopped fighting the denominations, and then started fighting among ourselves; then we started fighting among the “conservatives”; and finally some have to fight it out within local churches. I have never seen so many splits over matters of so little substance, as some congregations have experienced of late.

We need peace with God and peace from God (1 Cor. 7:15; Eph. 6:21; Phil. 4:9). We need peace among ourselves (1 Thess. 5:13; Jas. 3:18). And inasmuch as in us lieth, let us live peaceably with all men (Rom. 12:18; Heb. 12:14). No, not peace at any price, but “peace that passeth all understanding” (Phil. 4:7). “Let the peace of God rule in your hearts” (Col. 3:5). And let us discuss differences without anger, misrepresentation, or seeking to reap personal revenge upon those with whom we disagree. May we all seriously endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace Eph. 4:3). It’s high time that we started using all of these unity verses in the Bible on ourselves, and quit misapplying them to the denominations. God couldn’t care less that the denominations are divided.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 161, 184
March 21, 1985

By O.C. Birdwell

A sermon was preached in which sin, repentance, and forgiveness were discussed. The subject was the Corinthians, their sins, Paul’s rebuke of them, and their repentance. Some of the sins of these people were listed as follows: The “sins committed were numerous.” There was “factionalism,” “carnality,” and “unnecessary lawsuits.” They were “harboring an incestuous man.” They were “either deliberately or ignorantly violating the consciences of others. ” They were “not partaking of the Lord’s Supper, but conducting their own with over indulgences and excesses.” There was “failure to properly exercise spiritual gifts,” and “error regarding the resurrection” was taught.

The Corinthians “became arrogant” and “had not mourned.” It was affirmed that Paul’s letter “produced godly sorrow in them.” The letter was designed “to change their thinking.” They then “approved themselves to be pure.” Quite clearly this was after their sin, Paul’s first letter, and their repentance (2 Cor. 7: 11). It was shown that this case illustrates “genuine repentance.” It was also stated that “repentance is not genuine until the offense is stopped” and “there can be no forgiveness without repentance.”

This all sounds good and is scriptural, but the sermon was not over. The preacher went on to affirm that Paul’s letter was designed to change their thinking and keep them in the way of “being saved, ” and that “the lesson we must learn from this is what the Corinthians did in order to stay in the way that leads to ultimate salvation.” It was clearly inferred that while they were committing all the sins listed, at the same time, they stood before God in a saved relationship. It was affirmed that “true repentance removes any regrets and causes one to say, ‘I stopped it because it is, wrong and would eventually result in my eternal misery.”‘

I have no problem with the statement, “We are all in the process of being saved,’ 1 if by that it is meant that we are in the process of trying to go to heaven. The question I insist on being answered is, “Were those people, who were guilty of the above sins, standing before God in a saved relationship before their repentance? If they had died before their repentance, would they go to heaven?”

My Bible indicates that the guilty Corinthians, who were children of God, stood before God in a lost condition because of their sins. Those who were guilty of “factionalism” and “carnality” committed the sins of “envy, strife, and division” (1 Cor. 3:3) – sins listed by Paul in the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:19-21 which keep a Christian out of the kingdom of heaven. To those who were defiling the temple of God by division, Paul said, “If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy” (1 Cor. 3:16). To those involved in lawsuits, Paul said, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). Those who cause a weak brother to stumble, “sin” against their brethren and “sin against Christ” (1 Cor. 8:12). The misuse of one’s liberties was still under discussion when Paul said, “But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway” (1 Cor. 9:27) and “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10: 12).

Regarding those who denied the resurrection, Paul had considerable to say. He identified the resurrection as fundamental to the doctrine of Christ (1 Cor. 15:12-19). Those who deny the bodily resurrection, also denied Christ’s resurrection by implication. Their false doctrines were dangerous, even to those who followed them with a good conscience. Paul warned, “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33). Those who did not keep the resurrection as part of their faith did not stay saved (1 Cor. 15:1-3). This is not a problem peculiar to the first century. There are brethren today who deny that there is a future second coming of Jesus and bodily resurrection. Are these false teachers in the “process of being saved”? Surely a gospel preacher could not describe those who deny the resurrection as being in the “process of being saved”!

Our Baptist friends have argued “once in grace, always in grace” for years. When one asks them about a person who was saved becoming involved in a sin, they sometimes reply, “He never was saved to start with.” Some of our brethren are not much different. They argue that a child of God who becomes involved in sin remains in the “process of being saved” in spite of his sins. If one raises the question of what would happen to this man if he is confronted with his sin and chooses to remain in it, these preachers begin to answer like our Baptist friends. If this man in the “process of being saved” commits a sin, they say he remains in a saved relationship with God. When you confront him and he decides to continue in his sin, he becomes lost. Hence, why should I tell him about his sin? My confronting him with his sin might cause him to become lost! There response is this: “If he chooses to stay in his sin, he never was saved to start with” (i.e., he never was good, honest, and sincere). The differences in these two positions are too small for me to distinguish.

If one will tell us plainly where the child of God stands before God, after he sins and before he repents, I believe the discussion on this subject will be over. Gospel preachers have fallen on hard times when they can’t tell a person who is guilty of carnality, factionalism, harboring an incestuous man, denying the resurrection of the body, and going to law with a brother whether or not they stand justified before God!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 166-167
March 21, 1985

By Mike Willis

Each of the synoptic gospels relates the miracle which Jesus performed when He calmed the sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:23-28; Mk. 4:35-41; Lk. 8:22-25). This is one of the most impressive miracles which Jesus performed.

Jesus had taught the people by parables (Mk. 4:35). He planned to cross the Sea of Galilee to go the country of the Gadarene demoniac, whom He healed later that day. Luke’s account reads as follows:

Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto them, Let us go over unto the other side of the lake. And they launched forth. But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled with water, and were in jeopardy. And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was a calm. And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this? For he commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him.

Lessons From the Miracle

1. The nature of Jesus. Both the humanity and the deity of Jesus are observed in this incident. The humanity of Jesus is seen in the reference to Him sleeping, for of God it is said, “Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.” The deity of Jesus is manifested by His ability to calm the stormy sea.

2. Jesus was calm in the midst of the storm. While the storm beat down upon the lake, Jesus lay in the back of the boat asleep. He was at peace with Himself and His Father. “In Him we behold here the exact reverse of Jonah (Jon. i. 5, 6); the fugitive prophet asleep in the midst of a like danger out of a dead conscience, the Savior out of a pure conscience – Jonah by his presence making the danger, Jesus yielding a pledge and assurance of deliverance from it” (R.C. Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord, p. 89).

In contrast to His calmness and peace, we see the agitation in the hearts of the disciples. After calming the storm, Jesus asked, “Where is your faith?” His question demonstrates that their agitation was an evidence of an absence of faith.

None of the disciples of Christ are exempt from trials and life threatening circumstances. God has never promised us that our lives would be without storms and troubles. In these troubles, sometimes the disciples of Christ die. Jesus never promised us that the troubles of life would not cause some of us to die. Nevertheless, He expressed that their agitation and turmoil were a result of an absence or deficiency in faith.

This kind of agitation is similar to that mentioned in Matthew 6 in which a man worries about food, clothing, and shelter. Both cases manifest a man who is not trusting the providence of God and His provisions for us. If, in the providence of God, I must face the storm and even if that storm causes my death, my God is stiff providing for me and taking care of me. I must learn to trust God amid the storms of life. Job manifested this kind of trust when he said, “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him” (Job. 13:15).

3. The fisherman turned to the Carpenter. Peter, James, and John were in the boat with Jesus. These men were fishermen by trade, experienced in handling a boat. If one were going to experience bad weather in a boat on the Sea of Galilee, Peter, James and John would be the kind of men who would be best prepared to handle a boat in the storm. Nevertheless, when the storm hit and their boating experience was unable to cope with the storm, these experienced boaters turned to Jesus, the carpenter from Nazareth for help. Why would fishermen turn to a carpenter for help in managing a boat in the midst of a storm?

Obviously, the disciples recognized that Jesus was able to do something to help them which they could not do for themselves. Although they were surprised by what He did, their turning in desperation to Jesus for help manifested a degree of faith in Jesus.

4. Jesus controlled the winds and the waves. Jesus was able to speak a word and calm the elements of nature. The omnipotence of God enables Him to control the seas. “Thou rulest the raging of the sea: when the waves thereof arise, thou stillest them” (Psa. 89:9). An ordinary man cannot control the waves of the sea. This miracle by Jesus demonstrates His omnipotence and control over nature. The deity of Christ is proven by miracles such as this.

There has never been a modern miracle worker attempt to do what Jesus did. He may try to heal a man who is partially blind so that he can see better, to enable a man partially deaf to hear better, to have someone cough up a tumor, and some other “miracle” which one can never verify. However, there is no modem miracle worker who could dare stand before tho blowing winds and raging sea and demonstrate his ability to perform a miracle by saying, “Peace, be still.”

Conclusion

May this miracle of Jesus impress us once more with His divine care for us, His ability to help us in any desperate circumstance, and our need to trust in God. Him whom we serve is indeed able to come to our help and meet our most desperate need. In closing, I quote the words of the familiar hymn “Master, The Tempest Is Raging.”

Master, the tempest is raging!
The billows are tossing high!
The sky is o’er-shadowed with blackness,
No shelter or help is nigh,
Carest Thou not that we perish?
How canst Thou lie asleep,
When each moment so madly is threatening
A grave in the angry deep?

Master, with anguish of spirit
I bow in my grief today,
The depths of my sad heart are troubled –
O waken and save, I pray;
Torrents of sin and of anguish
Sweep o’er my sinking soul;
And I perish! I perish! dear Master
O hasten and take control;

Master, the terror is over,
The elements sweetly rest,
Earth’s sun in the calm lake is mirrored,
And heaven’s within my breast,
Linger, O blessed Redeemer!
Leave me alone no more,
And with joy I shall make the best harbor,
And rest on the blissful shore.

The winds and the waves shall obey Thy will,
Peace, be still! Peace, be still!
Whether the wrath of the storm tossed sea,
Or demons or men, or whatever it be,
No waters can swallow the ship where lies
The Master of ocean, and earth, and skies,
They all shall sweetly obey thy will,
Peace, be still! Peace, be still!
They all shall sweetly obey Thy will
Peace, peace, be still!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 6, pp. 162, 181
March 21, 1985

By Mike Wilson

The general consumption of intoxicating beverages and consequent drunkenness is not met with divine approval in the Bible. God’s attitude toward “strong drink” is expressed in terms of condemnation. “Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler; and whosoever erreth thereby is not wise” (Prov. 20:1). “And even these reel with wine, and stagger with strong drink; they are swallowed up of wine, they stagger with strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment” (Isa. 28:7). “Be not among winebibbers . . .” (Prov. 23:20). “Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, When it sparkleth in the cup, When it goeth down smoothly; At the last it biteth like a serpent, And stingeth like an adder. Thine eyes shall behold strange things, And thy heart shall utter perverse things” (Prov. 23:31-33).

Part of the confusion arises by the translation of “wine” of some words in both the Old and New Testaments which can refer to fresh juice from the vineyard, with no measurable alcoholic content. The common word for “wine” in the New Testament, oinos, can bean either fermented wine or fresh grape juice. The context must determine the meaning.

A second factor involves the potency of the alcoholic content. “Wine was the most intoxicating drink known in ancient times. All the wine was light wine, i.e. not fortified with extra alcohol. Concentrated alcohol was only known in the Middle Ages when the Arabs invented distillation (‘alcohol’ is an Arabic word) so what is now called liquor or strong drink (i.e., whiskey, gin, etc.) and the twenty percent fortified wines were unknown in Bible times. Beer was brewed by various methods, but its alcoholic content was light. The strength of natural wines is limited by two factors. The percentage of alcohol will be half the sugar in the juice. And if the alcoholic content is much above 10 or 11 percent, the yeast cells are killed and fermentation ceases. Probably ancient wines were 7-10 percent” (Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Vol. I, p. 376). The same Wordbook defines “strong drink” thus: “strong drink, beer. Most likely not ‘liquor’ for there is no evidence of distilled liquor in ancient times. It denotes not just barley beer but any alcoholic beverage prepared from either grain or fruit” (Vol. II, p. 927).

When we read the word “wine” in the Bible, we should not immediately equate it with the beverages sold in the modern bars, supermarkets, and liquor stores. Whiskey, gin, brandy, vodka, and even fortified wines are all more potent than the “strong drink” which the Bible condemns.

A third factor which must be considered when comparing modern beverages to ancient ones is the manner in which wine was used as a common table drink. Notice the following quotes from Everett Ferguson, “Wine as a Table-Drink int eh Ancient World,” Restoration Quarterly (Vol. 13):

– The ordinary table beverage of the Mediterranean world in Roman time was wine mixed with water (p. 141).

– At Greek formal banquets the guests elected a president who determined the proportions of water and wine (p. 141).

– The ratio of wine to wine varied considerably. One of the earliest references gives the most diluted mixtures – twenty parts water to one part wine (was the wine really that strong?). Other references tend to stay within less extreme proportions, but nearly always the quantity of water predominated” (p. 142).

– Plutarch himself says, “We call a mixture ‘wine’, although the larger of the components is water” (p. 144).

– But to drink wine unmixed was regarded by the Greeks of the classical age as a Barbarian (Scythian) custom. It is to be noted how in ordinary usage, even as “wine” meant “wine mixed with water,” so if one wanted to say straight or neat wine, it was necessary to add the adjective “unmixed” (p. 145).

– One might even call the ancients “water drinkers” in view of the preponderance of water in the drink. In most cases, however, it was safer and more hygienic to drink wine. Somehow the ancients had discovered that mixing wine with water had a purifying effect on the water so that it became safe to drink (p. 146).

Writing on the same theme, professor Robert Stein of Bethel College says, “To consume the amount of alcohol that is in two martinis by drinking wine containing three parts water to one part wine, one would have to drink over twenty-two glasses. In other words, it is possible to become intoxicated from wine mixed with three parts of water, but one’s drinking would probably affect the bladder long before it affected the mind.”

Even still, the ideal for early Christians was abstinence. In relation to intoxicating beverages, excessive drinking and drunkenness are not the only vices the New Testament condemns. “Carousings” (or, “drinking parties,” from potos) in 1 Peter 4:3 is a general word for “drinking.” R.C. Trench, in Synonyms of the New Testament, says the term is “not of necessity excessive,” But is related to words of excess in that it gives “opportunity for excess” (p[. 211). Elders (1 Tim. 3:2), women of influence (1 Tim. 3:11), and older men (Tit. 3:2) are commanded to be “temperate” (nephalios), a word implying freedom from all wine (see Thayer, p. 425). “This word shows strongly that the New Testament ideal is total abstinence” (Joseph Free, Archeology And Bible History, p. 355).

Considering God’s attitude toward intoxication and strong drink, the comparative potency of ancient wine to modern liquor, the ideal of abstinence from the weaker beverages of the time practiced by early Christians, and the danger of ungodly influence in a world full of alcoholism, can there be any justification of modern “drinking”? We think not. After denouncing the partying sins of reveling and drunkenness, the apostle Paul commands, “But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof” (Rom. 13:14).

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 5, pp. 145, 148
March 7, 1985