Truth Magazine

By William C. Sexton

God, the Creator and Provider of man, provides peace for those who allow Him to rule in their hearts! He rules through His word which is understandable and practical. He has basic teachings relative to the various aspects of the Family, which is the basic unity in society and in the life and development of each person’s existence.

There are problems in the American family today, as there has always been problems in families; the solution is to be found in the scriptures, the New Testament in particular. We wish to examine three areas of trouble and make some suggestions relative to scriptural solutions.

Paul, writing to the church in Colosse, set forth some words worthy of our consideration relative to our duty in the family setting:

And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teachings and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them. Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged (Col. 3:15-21).

The inspired writer, after instructing servants also, says:

Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Jesus Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons (vs. 24-25).

“Peace” is a wonderful concept, a product that is desired by all. Such is man’s, to possess only as he participates in letting the word of Christ “dwell” in his heart “richly” in all wisdom.

The realistic observer will take seriously the promise and affirmation that the doer-of-wrong will not escape the consequences and/or fruit of his/her behavior. With that picture of suffering in one’s mind relative to the wrong-doer, one can appreciate the promise of “reward” to the Lord serving-person and, hopefully, such will motivate each to be careful that he/she is such a person. With faith in the accuracy of those statements, we encourage each to consider his/her role and performance in the family setting.

I. Disorientation: “lack or loss of ability to locate oneself.” Due to the many conflicting ideas advanced and practiced today in our society, as we listen and observe, many are faced with confusion, disorientation! They have no “clear-cut view” of what is right and/or wrong.

1. Roles of the husband and/or wife. What is right? At one time, the husband brought “home the bacon,” and the wife stayed “home and raised the kids.” Such was expected and most of the time each person felt that such was the way it was to be; he or she who did not “fit into” that role was an outcast. However, there is so much said and done about that way being oppressive to women and unproductive to all, that many who would “like” to perform the old role, feel guilty and/or confused attempting to do what the many seem to think is the modern way of freedom.

Scriptural Solution: God recognizes the head of the family to be man (1 Cor. 11:2-3). However, man need not be one who dominates his wife. To stay home, just for the sake of staying home, and feeling miserable and unproductive is not necessary! There is a need to recognize and appreciate God’s order, but it is not right for one to interpret His word one-sidedly, all in favor of man’s freedom and woman’s captivity; to recognize the order that the God of heaven has set and appreciate it is to position oneself so as to be happy in this life and productive at the same time.

2. Discipline of self and/or children. What is good and acceptable, to many is not clear. Many views have been advanced and the air is left filled with uncertainty.

Scriptural Solution: Hear the Lord: “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). “We have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence” (Heb. 12:9). “If ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons” (Heb. 12:8). Accordingly, observation of behavioral development manifest the necessity of discipline of self and those around us.

“Children obey” your parents, such is necessary for your benefit and those around you; so, the Lord has demanded it.

“Fathers, provoke not to anger,” because such brings discouragement and harms the child’s advancement; nevertheless, demonstrate the benefit of discipline in your own life and expect it from those under you.

Wives be faithful to your husbands, not giving yourselves to another, thereby breaking your bond with the one to whom God has joined you (Mt. 19:6-9).

Husbands love and protect your wives, be faithful to them, knowing that they are a part of you. The two of you became one, by God joining you together. To be unfaithful is to displease God and close the door to heaven (1 Cor. 6:9; Gal. 5:19-20; 1 Cor. 7:10-11).

If one is convinced that God’s word is true and the standard that will produce happiness, he/she will accept and apply it. Then problems are solved, not once for all, but every one is faced and overcome according to the wisdom from above (Jas. 3:17-18).

II. Disorganization: “lack of meaningful or orderly relations”! The home is where people share in affection, concern, responsibilities, etc. Today’s society has so many things going that the members in many families do not get together enough to share, exchange affections, and speak of their feelings toward each other.

1. Women are working and making more money, and issuing more demands. Often the husband develops interests which are not compatible with the partner. Consequently, hostility is more likely than mutual respect and honor in many homes today.

2. Children are sent off to schools where they are taught different ideas and God’s word is often mocked; the schools often insist that they – the children – participate in things that take them away from home-teachings. Some homes begin to accept the school’s and/or peer’s standard instead of the one the parents have taught and cried to follow.

Time spent together is limited; action together is almost none, while each member develops different interests (job, recreation, etc.).

The family-members develop interest in other people, wanting to “live” as some say. Many turn to drinking, parties, activities, associations which destroy the need. So family closeness and concern are neglected till it is too late.

Scriptural Solution: accept the primary responsibility, which is to serve God first. One cannot do that without providing for his own family (1 Tim. 5:8). He who fails at this level, denies the faith and, in comparison with infidels, is on the lower end. It means much, much more to provide for the family than just the financial necessities! It includes the spiritual, emotional, moral, and community qualities and attachments.

III. Disintegration: “disruption of an organized system.” Relationships established to be life-long-unions are being broken up at an alarming rate! Look at the listing in the local newspaper at the divorce cases filed and the marriage licenses issued; they often seem to be about the same in number. Why? There are many problems, perhaps. However, the lack of performance, wrong ideas as to what is to be expected, and unwillingness to be realistic and apply the scriptures stand high, I believe, in the list of causes.

Some Guideline Facts

1. God created man and woman for each other, and they are to stay together for life, once joined (Rom. 7:3-4; 1 Cor. 7:10-11)!

2. Expectations relative to romantic love, as being an everlasting high-pitched, continuous experience is unrealistic, unachievable! Yet, such seems to be expected by many. When something less is experienced, they are willing to give up and give in, running after the “impossible dream,” only to learn too late that such is unobtainable!

3. Failure to work out problems when they develop will lead to an unbearable situation. Every relationship will develop problems and, if not attended to, will lead to a disintegration of that relationship. So, it is happening in America, often among those who claim to be “Christians.” At times, the rationalization following the disintegration is to the end: God would not expect us to do the impossible – to live together or to live apart, without mates for a life-time (cf. Matt. 19:3-9; Rom. 7:3-4; 1 Cor. 7:10-11).

4. Love is essential to a happy marriage; but love alone is inadequate to hold such together successfully.

Scriptural Solution: Love and appreciation for God and faith that He has set forth a plan that is workable and desirable. Determine to make it work in your case; refuse to give up or in (cf. Psa. 19:8; Jas. 1:21-25)! When a problem arises, as such is sure to do, ask, “What is God’s will in this?” (2 Tim. 2:15; 3:16-17; Mt. 7:21-27). When that will is determined from a study and search of the word, apply that immediately (Jn. 13:17; Eph. 6:10-18; Heb. 5:11-14; 6:lff)! Make any adjustments, not expecting the other to do all the changing and adjusting! Deal effectively and persistently, making your contribution to growth together in God’s way!

Beloved, problems will arise in your family relationship as well as in every other. Yet, such can be solved, when God’s word is examined, accepted, and applied (cf. Phil. 4:13; 3:13-16). Whatever your role in the family, it is to your advantage and benefit to make your contribution! Are you doing that?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 10, pp. 155-157
March 5, 1981

By Eugene Crawley

In writing to “them that have obtained like precious faith with us . . .” (2 Pet. 1:1), the apostle goes on in this epistle to these brethren to point out the condition of those who failed to add the Christian virtues (vs. 5-7). He said, “But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins” (vs. 9). These were not, and are not, the only brethren who have forgotten their calling by the gospel and the obligations connected with discipleship. Certainly those who fail to add to their faith, to grow spiritually, will soon forget that they were purged (cleansed) from their old sins.

Such individuals lose interest in the “like precious faith”; they forget the responsibility they accepted in the kingdom of Christ by being purged (saved) from their old sins and being born into God’s family. By being baptized into Christ, where all spiritual blessings are to be enjoyed (Eph. 1:3), not only do we have access to these many blessings, we take upon us duties that must faithfully be discharged if we are to continue to be clean and pure in the sight of God. Remember, James said, as he wrote to Christians, ” . . .. receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls” (Jas. 1:21). Therefore, we must continue to apply (obey) the word of God to remain pure and justified in His sight. Truly we need His word daily to direct us in our life in Christ, and preparation for eternity.

There are a number of things forgotten by many brethren; at least they do not follow them, so surely they have forgotten. Shall we notice some of these:

Purging (Cleansing). This is said by Peter to have been forgotten by some of his brethren. If one rises from the waters of baptism a new creature, cleansed from sin, and makes no further progress – does not add to his faith, he is very likely to forget even the joy experienced when he was made a new creation in Christ. He will fail to remember that, as a new creature, he is expected by the Lord to “walk in the light as He is in the light” so as to have fellowship with Him and others of the like precious faith, and continue to have his sins cleansed by the blood of Christ (1 Jn. 1:7). How sad that the memory of some is so short; what a blessing it is to know that in Christ Jesus He provides for our every need spiritually and that we can go on unto perfection (maturity). Not a few, later in life begin to wonder if they ever really obeyed the Lord from the heart, and desire to be immersed again.

Zeal. This is another thing that is often forgotten. When one obeys the gospel, he usually does so with zeal and determination to accomplish great things in the service of the Master. Yet, if he fails to add these virtues, he soon forgets and loses his fervor; he is no longer “on fire” with zeal; he drifts back into the world and is overcome with sin; he is satisfied to feed upon the husks of the devil rather than the pure word of God.

Influence. Upon obedience to the gospel, one’s influence for good is increased. He may never know how many are encouraged by his obedience and will eventually do God’s will to save themselves. However, if he forgets about his influence, fails to appreciate the fact that he can be an instrument for good to be used by the Lord, and goes back into the world, those individuals may never be saved. What a pity that every Christian does not think more of his own soul and the souls of others whom he may influence, than to allow the devil to entice him and lure him back into the clutches of sin and servitude of Satan, the god of this world.

Importance Of Making The Calling Sure. “If ye do these things, ye shall never fall,” so Peter declared (v. 10) and said (v. 11) that “an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom”; this way we may ensure our eternal welfare. But if we forget its importance and become engrossed in the things of the world, we will soon be in worse condition than the beginning, for Peter so states in 2 Peter 2:20-22. Brethren who forsake the assembling, half-heartedly engage in worship to God when present, stand back while others bear the load and do the task, and are dilatory in service to God in general, will be shocked in judgment to learn that they have failed to make adequate preparation.

Indeed, many “hath forgotten” these responsibilities and, in their unfaithfulness, are influencing others either to remain in sin, or return to the world and the power of Satan. Have you forgotten? If so, bring to remembrance the blessings you once enjoyed, the hope you had as a faithful child of God, and the duties you have shirked and return to the Lord before it is too late!

Guardian of Truth XXV: 10, pp. 154-155
March 5, 1981

By Wayne S. Walker

Doctrine

It is difficult to pinpoint certain items of Catholic doctrine as to time since its dogma is an ever evolving thing and the church of today is not the same organization as the one of a hundred or a thousand years ago. Catholicism, like Mormonism, believes in continuous revelation and the primary mode of this revelation is the tradition of the church. In Question Box (p. 75), we read, “By what right do you teach doctrines not found in the Bible? Because the origin of our faith is not in the Bible alone but the Church which gives us both the written and the unwritten word.”(1) Jesus condemned this attitude when He told the Pharisees, “Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition” (Mk. 7:9). Furthermore, “the faith . . . was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3, NASB). “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Heb. 13:8). So is His word and so should be His church. There is one item where we agree with the Catholics – that there is only one true church (Eph. 4:4). However, we would disagree as to which one it is!

It was around 110 A.D., when one bishop in each church began to assume greater authority, as noted previously, and the word `Catholic” began to be applied to a religious organization. The true church should be called after Christ (Rom. 16:16). The practice of confirming infants started around 200. Originally they were completely immersed! But only “men and women” (i.e., believing, penitent adults) should be baptized according to Acts 8.:12. Anthony of Egypt was the first monk (in 250 A.D.) and the practice became popular around 450. Jesus taught that instead of hiding our lights under a bushel (in a monastery?) we should let them shine (Matt. 5:14-16). Severity to the physical body is of no value against the lust of the flesh but is a display of will worship after the doctrines and commandments of men (Col. 2:20-23). The first instance of sprinkling an adult for baptism was in 253. It was approved for emergencies in 753 but not officially adopted as the standard practice until 1311 at the Council of Ravenna. The Bible says “we are buried with him by baptism” (Rom. 6:3-4).

In 306; certain aspects of Christmas came into the church and by 325 the same was true for Easter. Gal. 4:10-11 and Col. 2:16 teach that we are not to celebrate religious holidays. Augustine of Hippo, who lived from 354-430, developed the doctrine of original sin and it was solidified at the Council of Trent in 1545. God’s word tells us sin is something we do (1 Jn. 3:4) not inherit, and that it is not passed on from father to son (Ezek. 18:19-23), let alone from Adam. Each man is responsible for his own sins. Little babies are not born in sin but are pure “for of such is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 19:14). The concept of the Mass arose in 394 and transubstantiation in 1215. In this, the bread and wine allegedly become the literal body and blood of Christ which are then sacrificed over and over again, day after day as the Eucharist is performed. Yet the New Testament teaches, “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many” (Heb. 9:28). Besides, Jesus was no more talking literally when He said of the bread, “This is my body” (Matt. 26:26) than when He said, “I am the door” (Jn. 10:9). It is figurative language – the bread represents His body.

Mary was defined as “the Mother of God” in 421. Prayers to Mary and other saints were authorized in 553. Her immaculate conception (1854) and bodily assumption (1950) are also Catholic dogma. She is adored as Queen of Heaven, divine Mary, perpetual Virgin (which is false, Matt. 1:24; “till” implies that after she gave birth to Jesus she did know Joseph in the conjugal relationship; cf. also Matt. 13:55), and Mediatress. Catholic authorities deny Mary is worshiped but a book written specifically for Catholics reads, “The Holy Church commands a worship peculiar to Mary.”(2) Jesus taught, “Thou shalt worship the Lord, thy God, and him only shalt thou serve” (Matt. 4:10). And Paul wrote, “There is . . . one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5).

Most reference works ascribe the introduction of instrumental music into worship to Pope Vitalian I (657-672). “The organ is said to have been first introduced into church music by Pope Vitalian I in 666.”(3) Some doubt the validity of this statement, and even if true it represents as isolated event.(4) The first known use of instruments in a church is 757 when “a great organ was sent as a present to Pepin by the Byzantine emperor, Constantine Copronymus, and placed in the church of St. Corneille at Compagne. Soon after Charlemagne’s time, organs became common.”(5) The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913 edition) states, “A strong objection to the organ in church service remained pretty general down to the twelfth century . . . . But from the twelfth century on the organ became the privileged church instrument.”(6)Scripture authorizes only singing (vocal music) in worship (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). John Calvin rightly noted, “Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the law. The Papists, therefore, have foolishly borrowed this, as well as many other things, from the Jews.”(7)

The second Nicean council of 787 authorized the veneration of holy images and relics in the churches. These icons are in effect idols (graven images, Ex. 20:4) and are condemned in the New Testament (Acts 17:29; 1 Jn. 5:20). The doctrine of celibacy was ordained in 1123, prohibiting the marriage of the priesthood. We know Peter was married (Mk. 1:30; 1 Cor. 9:5). “Forbidding to marry” is one of the signs of the great apostasy (1 Tim. 4:1-3). Marriage is honorable in all otherwise scriptural circumstances (Heb. 13:4; cf. Gen. 2:18). Certainly being unmarried is not wrong (Matt. 19:12; 1 Cor. 7:1-8) but it is never commanded for anyone. In 1215 the dogma of auricular confession, confession to a priest, was passed by a council in Rome. Catholics say they do not really confess to a priest but to God through the priest. But all Christians are priests (1 Pet. 2:5) and confess directly to God (1 Jn. 1:9). They may also confess one to another (Jas. 5:16) but nothing is said of having to do so in the present of a “clergyman” who then pronounces forgiveness.

The year 1414 saw the end to using both bread and wine in the communion, and using only bread. Yet when Jesus took the cup He told His disciples, “Drink ye all of it”; that is, all of you drink some of it. In 1431, the doctrine of purgatory was defined with its corollaries of praying for the dead and the ungodly practice of selling indulgences. This says that there is a time of purging of venial sin after death. If it were so, Lk. 16:19-31 is false. Heb. 9:27 states, “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.” Then in 1870 the dogma of papal infallibility was accepted. The pope is supposedly infallible when he speaks publicly on matters of a religious nature ex cathedra (from the throne). However Paul taught in 1 Cor. 4:6, “That ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written” (KJV).

Around 157 the Biblical concept of repentance (Acts 8:22) started turning into the false doctrine of penance. This, in turn, gave rise to the seven sacraments: baptism, confirmation, marriage, eucharist, penance, holy orders, and extreme unction. When these administered by a properly ordained priest. Catholics believe the church becomes the dispenser of God’s grace. This is not true. Neither term “sacrament” nor the idea is found in scripture. This means of receiving God’s grace is obedience to “the word of his grace” (Acts 20:32). A similar teaching is that the church is the dispenser of God’s word. when one discusses the Bible with a Catholic, he may respond, “But the Catholic Church gave us the Bible.” This is not true either. The men who wrote the Bible were not Catholics. While a “Catholic” council did approve the canon of Scripture, they made no new decisions but merely put their stamp of “approval” of what was already generally accepted. Neither do we depend on Catholic manuscripts or translations. The Bible is not the product of the church, but the true church is a product of the Bible. However, the Catholic church is not a product of the Bible because the majority of her doctrines and practices are condemned by it – even by the Catholic versions!

Conclusion

The story is told of a Catholic priest who met a little girl riding her bicycle on the sidewalk. She politely said, “Hello, sir.” He replied, “Hello, little girl. Do you know who I am. I am a priest and you should address me as Father.” The girl, who attended Bible school and had read her Bible, then quoted Matt. 23:9 saying, “Call no man your father upon the earth.” As he walked away, the priest was heard to exclaim, “She knows too much Bible for her own good.”

The Roman Catholic Church is not the church of the New Testament. Rather, it is the fulfillment of numerous predictions in the Scriptures concerning apostasy. It arose because of false teaching and has been sustained through the years by Biblical ignorance. It has corrupted nearly every aspect of true Christianity and is definitely “of this world” (Jn. 18:36). God said that His church would never be destroyed (Dan 2:44). It was not. It has always existed through the written word (Lk 8:11). Whenever and wherever anyone read, believed, and obeyed the Scriptures, he became a Christian, a member of Christ’s church without the aid of any ecclesiastical organization. This is exactly what churches of Christ are trying to do today.

It has always been a characteristic of mankind, from the beginning of creation, to depart from God’s Ways. We can see this in Adam and Eve, the post-deluvian world, the Hebrew people during the period of judges, the Jewish nation as a whole under their kings, and the church of the Lord beginning around the second century. But it is not over. Even today, some of the same departures that led to the formation of the Catholic church are being practiced by brethren: sponsoring churches, area-wide meetings, church-supported institutions, and “Mission congregations” where the elders of one church directly oversee the work of another church. The spirit of lawlessness is at work today just as it was back then. Brethren, let us learn from history and beware.

Endnotes:

1. Lambert, op. cit., p. 22.

2. Liguori, Bishop Alphonse de; The Glories of Mary, p. 130.

3. Kurfees, M.C.: Walking by Faith – Origin of Instrumental Music in Christian Worship (Gospel Advocate Company, Nashville, Tenn.; 1972, p. 17). Quotation from Chamber’s Encyclopedia.

4. Cocran, Brooks: “When Was the Instrument of Music First Introduced Into Christian Worship?” article in Truth Magazine (Cogdill Foundation, Dayton, Ohio), Vol. XXIV, No. 24, June 12, 1980, p. 386).

5. Kurfees, op. cit, pp. 17-18.

6. Cochran, op. cit.

7. Kurfees, op. cit., p. 20.

Questions

1. What is the major source of doctrine in the Catholic church?

2. What are the qualifications of a proper candidate for baptism?

3. How can we know that babies are not born with inherited sin?

4. Describe the doctrine of transubstantiation.

5. When was the first known use of an organ in a church service?

b. What sin is involved in the veneration of images and relics?

T. How should Christians confess their sins?

8. Cite some Scriptures that would refute the idea of purgatory.

9. Is there any sense in which the Catholic Church gave us the Bible?

10. Why should we not address Catholic priests as “Father”?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 10, pp. 152-154
March 5, 1981

By Dudley Ross

More and more articles are being written and sermons being delivered in which William Barclay is quoted to substantiate some point. The popularity of Barclay among brethren is quite understandable for at least two reasons. (1) His writings are numerous. Barclay had over twenty books on the market at the time of his death. (2) His ability to organize thoughts was remarkable. When one reads any of the short topics in his Daily Bible Study Series, this ability of Barclay is clearly observed. His short treatment of segments of the New Testament lends itself to quick and painless sermonizing.

There are a number of things about William Barclay that some are not aware of. Nearly everyone who reads after the man remarks that he is really good but no one seems to know where he gets his information for he does not document his sources. He treats a Greek or Hebrew word without citing any lexical authority. Yet he will use men like A.J. Gossip and C.H. Dodd without hesitation. C.H. Dodd’s writings are about as full of infidelity and modernism as anything you can find. Dodd’s biblical scholarship is very questionable also. Of course, that can be said likewise of Barclay.

Barclay never made any claims to genius or originality. He described his mind as “second class” and went on to admit, “It is the simple truth that I never had an original idea in my life. In all the books I have written I have explained and expounded other men’s ideas.”(1) However, Barclay failed to say just who the other men from whom he borrowed ideas were. While he was not secretive about his lack of originality, he was not shy about his ability to remember. He said, “If then I have a second-class mind, how did I emerge with a first-class honors degree in Classics? Because I happen to have a phenomenal memory, and I am therefore an excellent examinee which merely goes to show what a poor test of real ability examinations are.”(2)

William Barclay was a man whose ideas, admittedly borrowed, run quite contrary to those of faithful brethren. It is here that faithful brethren should take warning. Barclay was a liberal and, in a sense, a modernist. He admits as much when he discussed the problem of being “evangelical.” The term “evangelical” is misused, misapplied and exploited by denominationalists who claim they are fundamentalists and Bible believers who are born again Christians – or some such description. In reality they are not evangelical in any sense of the term, but when Barclay discussed the point here was his comment: “It has always been to me a matter of deep regret that the word evangelical must in the eyes of some people always by preceded by the word conservative – a conservative evangelical. An evangelical is surely one who loves the good news of God in Jesus Christ, and I cannot see why there should be no such thing as a liberal evangelical.”(3)

The evidence of the liberal theology of Barclay is abundant. When you read Barclay’s books, look at such topics in the index as “The Virgin Birth,” “Miracles” and “The Person of Christ.” As Barclay dealt with these and other matters related to them, he would often just cast a little aspersion on the belief in super natural matters. He did not directly deny the virgin birth of Jesus Christ in his commentary on Matthew but called it a “crude fact” and emphasized that it is not important to literally believe that Jesus was born only of a woman. Let us look at some things he had to say about the birth of Christ.

He argued that both genealogies recorded in the Gospel records are traced through Joseph and argued that Mary is never even mentioned, except to say that Joseph was her husband. He argued that the virgin birth story could not be taken literally. He argued, “If Jesus was the son of Mary alone, he was of Aaronic and not Davidic descent.”(4) He contended that there was a “strong strand of thought which was at least unaware of the Virgin Birth” in the New Testament text.(5) Then he alleged, “The phrase `born of woman’ has nothing to do with the Virgin Birth.”(6) This is the man many are quoting as an authority in sermons and articles.

His concept of the miracles is the classic modernistic position. He expressed it this way. “That which would be a miracle in one age or in one society is a commonplace in another. Even fifty years ago people would have regarded it as a miracle to be able to sit in a room and look into a glass-fronted box and see plays being acted, games being played, events happening hundreds and even thousands of miles away.”(7) Over twenty years ago, this writer had a confrontation with a Presbyterian preacher who contended that what the Jews considered miraculous provision of Manna from Heaven was now a natural thing in that Maniferis Sinaiticus is a regularly exported product from the peninsula of Sinai today. Of course the obvious reply was that Jesus endorsed the giving of the Manna as a miracle and based His claim to being the true “bread of life” on that miraculous occurence (John 6:48-51).

Barclay looked at the healing miracles as simple legends and not facts. He had no more faith in the miracles of healing Jesus performed than he did those of the pagans of Christ’s time. He described an event that took place in Alexandria when a blind man came to Vespasian and “besought him to cure him by touching his eyes with his spittle, and a man who had a diseased hand, who besought him to heal it by touching it with the sole of his foot.”(8) Barclay then related how the blind man saw again and said, “Both facts are attested to this day.” He affirmed, “There is every reason to believe that these cures happened, and that they were not uncommon in the ancient world.” Later, however, he attributes it all, including the miracles of Christ and the apostles, to the current thought of those ancient days. He did not believe in miracles as divine intervention in the natural realm of the world. This man who regarded the miracles of Jesus as understood only in the characteristic Hebrew exagerations, is quoted far too often today by faithful brethren.

Barclay really did not believe that Jesus was God. Here is an area that is enigmatic in studying Barclay, for one time he wrote of his faith in Christ, but then made such statements as these. “It is not that Jesus is God. Time and time again the Fourth Gospel speaks of God sending Jesus into the world. Time and time again we see Jesus praying to God. Time and time again we see Jesus unhesitatingly and unquestioningly and unconditionally accepting the will of God for himself. Nowhere does the New Testament identify Jesus and God. (My emphasis, DRS) He said: `He who has seen me has seen God.’ There are attributes of God I do not see in Jesus. I do not see God’s omniscience in Jesus, for there are things which Jesus did not know (sic).”(9)

There are any number of other errors Barclay taught. There are some things he wrote that are well said, but when one is as liberal and modernistic as was Barclay, it is difficult to trust him. It is important to know the theology of a man if we are going to use him authoritatively. It is like using Thayer as a lexical authority, keeping in mind that the man was Unitarian. As the publishers preface reads, “A word of caution is necessary. Thayer was a Unitarian, and the errors of this sect occasionally come through in the expalatory notes. The reader should be alert for both subtle and blatant denials of such doctrines as the Trinity (Thayer regarded Christ as a mere man and the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force emanating from God), the inherent and total depravity of fallen human nature, the eternal punishment of the wicked, and Biblical inerrancy.”(10) The same is said in regard to Barclay and the works he left. This article is just a word of caution.

Endnotes:

1. Barclay, W. “A Spiritual Biography, ” Eerdmans, 1975, p. 27.

2. Ibid. p. 28.

3. Ibid. pp. 102-103.

4. Barclay, W. The Mind of Jesus, Harper & Rowe, 1961, p. 329.

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid. p. 330.

7. Ibid. p. 68.

8. Ibid. p. 69.

9. Op. cit. p. 56.

10. Thayer, J.H. A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, Baker, 1977 (preface) p. vii.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 10, pp. 150-151
March 5, 1981