Truth Magazine

By Jarrod Jacobs

In the first century we find where the Apostles and early preachers placed the emphasis upon spiritual truths, upon spiritual needs, not on physical things.

Recently, I received a very cordial letter from a young man in White Bluff concerning some of the practices of the Pleasant View church of Christ, the congregation with whom I work. I thought it would be interesting for us to consider what this young man asked. Though the young man was upright and honest enough to give me his name, and ought to be commended for such behavior, I will not mention his name in this article for it has no bearing on the answer given. (Both letters have been edited for space.)

His letter to me:

“. . . It has been rumored by several neighboring congregations that you do not believe in having kitchens in the building. I am in no way condemning you. I am not trying to spread rumors either. I just wanted to know if this is true and if so why do you believe this? Please reply with a response. Thank you for your time.”

My response:

Thank you so much for taking the time to write and ask your questions. We really appreciate that. . . . From your letter, you said that you had heard some rumors about the church at Pleasant View from “neighboring congregations.” Please tell me, which congregations? I just wondered why they felt the need to tell people what we do and do not do. They are not like you, for you took time to write and ask about our practices. This is to be commended.

Now, to your questions. You asked, whether or not we “believe in having kitchens in the church building.” You further asked, “Why do you believe this?” These are both very good questions, and I will try to give you an answer from the Bible. First of all, let me begin by saying that it does not matter what “I believe” on any subject, but what matters is “what saith the Scripture?” (Rom. 4:3). There- fore, we need to start with the Scripture, and then base our lives around what God says (Col. 3:17). We are not to practice things we like, and then turn around and try to find authority for it “after the fact”! I’m sure you realize this, or you wouldn’t have written.

In order to answer your questions, let us ask ourselves, what is the nature of the church? Is it a spiritual entity, or physical? I believe we both would say that the church is a spiritual institution. Christ said, “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18). The church is described as the bride of Christ (John 3:29-30; Rev. 22:17). In Romans 14:17, we read, “For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink: but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” This passage makes clear that the function of the Lord’s church is not found in physi- cal things, but in spiritual matters. Romans 14:17 makes a progressive statement. Here, we see that the kingdom of God is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. When one strives for righteousness (God’s word, Ps. 119:172; Rom. 1:16-17), he will find peace with God, and then joy results from this peace. Notice again the fact that the peace and joy come not through worldly appeals, but through the spiritual appeal of Scripture! Therefore, the nature of a thing will determine its function! The nature of the church is spiritual, therefore its function is spiritual as well. In like manner, something with a physical nature will have a physical function (example: a block-laying company, etc.).

What purpose does a kitchen serve? Does it serve a physical or spiritual need? If it serves a spiritual need, every congregation of God’s people needs to have one! If physical, it has no place in the spiritual function of the church. In the first century we find where the Apostles and early preachers placed the emphasis upon spiritual truths, upon spiritual needs, not on physical things. Their objective was to preach the gospel (Rom. 1:16). Their goal was to bring lost souls to Christ (2 Cor. 5:20). Their mission was to “preach the word. . .” (2 Tim. 4:2). They also commended local congregations who did those very things (Rom. 1:8; 16:19, 26; 1 Thess. 1:6-8). Knowing that we may only “speak as the oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11), where do we find Jesus, Peter, Paul, James, or any other inspired man telling a local congregation that they need kitchens, or similar things in order to carry out the work God wanted them to do? Consider also the fact that if someone shows we can do the Lord’s work without the kitchen, then why have it at all? I enjoy eating as much as anyone, but we need to remember what the nature and function of the church is. Paul said, “if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation” (1 Cor. 11:34). If each local congregation adhered to this command, there would not be a problem concerning kitchens and the like.

Perhaps some might say to you that they see nothing wrong with a kitchen. Maybe some will say, “Look at all the good it does.” Others may argue that we are “too picky,” etc. But, when people do this, have they answered the argument? When people make comments about the brethren at Pleasant View, or when they spread rumors such as the ones you heard, does that change the nature of the church from spiritual to physical? Again, it is not what “I believe,” nor what the “brethren believe.” We are striving to do and to act only as the Bible says. I know you can appreciate this.

Please come and visit us any time! . . . In closing, let me commend your good attitude again. Thank you for writing and asking your questions. Thank you for having the courage to sign your name as well! To honorable people like you, this may seem to be nothing, but many refuse to sign their name for fear of any real contact. I appreciate what you have done, and hope to meet you at some future time.

Sincerely, Jarrod Jacobs

Peter’s apostleship, disposition, and out-spoken manner has offered many good lessons for us today; but, we shall notice only one of them in this short article. Mary was one the who poured the precious ointment on Jesus’ head and this story offers us some thought provokers, some of which we shall notice.

Peter

Matthew 26:58 reads, “But Peter followed him afar off unto the high priest’s palace, and went in, and sat with the servants, to see the end.”

Jesus had been in the Garden praying, with Peter, James, and John nearby asleep. Somewhere near midnight, those commissioned to do so came to arrest Jesus and this caused some commotion to the extent that all his disciples left him and fled. From this point on through his trials many observers were present: sight-seers, busybodies, those who hated Jesus, and those who were just curious.

When Jesus was arrested to be taken to the palace of the high priest, our text says, “Peter followed him afar off.” At this point Peter is seen as a distant disciple, one who would not follow close enough to be recognized as one of his disciples.

What caused Peter to be a distant disciple? I offer three things that, it seems to me, led to his condition:

First, he did not plan it that way. In fact he appears rather determined a little earlier, when he said, “Though I die with thee, yet will I not deny thee” (v. 35). So, Peter did not plan to be a distant disciple.

Second, he disobeyed the Lord. Jesus had said, “watch and pray” (v. 41). Peter apparently did neither.

Third, he obviously feared persecution.

Now, that we have looked at the causes of his being a distant disciple, let us take note of some of the consequences of his condition: It killed his enthusiasm to serve the Lord. It put him in a hostile crowd among the enemies of Jesus. Since he “sat with the servants to see the end,” we can say he had lost his faith. Last, but not least, he lost his courage and denied the Lord. Yes sir, some terrible consequences!

A little later, according to Luke 22:61, 62, after Peter had denied the Lord and Jesus simply turned and looked upon Peter, we are told that the look of Jesus broke his heart.

Dear reader, do you see any lessons in this for us today? If not, go back and re-read the causes for his being a distant disciple, and the consequences of such condition. The les- sons are there! Will we get them?

Mary

Mark 14:8 contains the statement about which we are concerned at this time, “She hath done what she could.” In this statement, Jesus is defending Mary’s actions against the critics present. Read the entire story in Mark 14:3-9. Jesus is in the home of Simon the leper, having a common meal. Mary came in and poured the precious ointment on the head of the Savior. Some showed indignation and called such act a waste. But Jesus defended Mary by saying, “She hath done what she could.”

There are at least five different and important lessons which we may learn from this story. Without taking the time for details or exhaustive consideration, let us mention them:

1. God does not expect the impossible, only that we do what we can. She was not like the one-talent man of Matthew 25.

2. True greatness is not determined by man, rather by the Lord. Some present thought Mary did wrong, but Jesus de- fended her, showing his approval of what she had done.

3. The true spirit of greatness is to be found in serving the Lord, by doing what we can for his honor and cause.

4. Small talents used are more important than great talents abused. Mary seemingly had little talent, but there was no hesitation is using it. Little things often count more than the things we consider great and mighty.

5. Opportunities to serve the risen Christ will someday end. Mary served while the opportunity was present, as we all ought to do.

Have you done what you can? Are you using those opportunities that are there? Are you willing to run the risk of criticism in order to serve the Lord? Great lessons are found in this story also. Will we get them?

Soured souls are embittered, angry, and frustrated. The truth lashes their minds. Their conscience is smitten. Unwilling to lay aside their selfish, stubborn pride, they attempt to disguise and hide their poisoned hearts. With every passing day, they descend deeper and deeper into their vat of vile thinking. Slowly, they wrap and imprison themselves in the cocoon of the bond of iniquity.

Feigned faith and hypocritical humility is the mask they wear to snare the innocent and entangle them in their web of deceit and malice. To some degree, perhaps, this is the story of Absalom. He “stole the hearts of the men of Israel” (2 Sam. 15:6). Ultimately, many were led astray. “Then two hundred men went with Absalom from Jerusalem who were invited and went innocently, and they did not know anything” (2 Sam. 15:11).

Here is how Absalom succeeded:

1. He expressed his sympathy for them (2 Sam. 15:4). Absalom told the people that he felt sorry for them. We all like to be pitied. We like those who show concern for our needs. Absalom played on this.

2. While lamenting their predicament, he told the people that he could not help them (2 Sam. 15:4). In effect, he said, “I really wish I could help you, but my hands are tied. Of course, if things were different, if I were king, if you were following me rather than my father, David, then I could help you. But as things stand now, there is nothing I can do.”

3. He made the people believe he was seeking their best interest (2 Sam. 15:4). This made the people want to take up Absalom’s cause. They had been snared by empty promises. There was no word from God. There was no divine authority for Absalom’s actions. It was all done by playing on emotions with enticing words. Absalom was only interested in Absalom. He was not concerned about the plight of the people. He made them think he was in order to win their favor. This is the way “evil men and seducers” work. They will make you believe they are helping you. In reality, they are merely using you to obtain their goals of self-promotion.

4. He made the people feel important (2 Sam. 15:11). Absalom “invited” them. Imagine the honor of being “invited” by the king’s son! He courted and wooed them with “good words and fair speeches.” “His speech was smoother than butter, but his heart was war; His words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords” (Ps. 55:21). “For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Jesus Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting” (Rom. 16:18).

Absalom’s innocent dupes were led as lambs to the slaughter. Chaos and corruption, rebellion and division resulted. They had been deceived by a clever, shrewd politician. Such conniving men still work among churches today. “These are grumblers, finding fault, following after their own lusts; they speak arrogantly, flattering people for the sake of gaining an advantage” (Jude 16). Beware of their snare!