Truth Magazine

By Herschel E. Patton

Many are so branded, even in the Bible. It is not a coveted designation. You may be one only in someone’s mind, or you may be one in actuality. Webster defines a fool as “(1) a simpleton; (2) a professional buffoon; (3) one made to appear foolish; a dupe – v.i. 1. To play the fool; to trifle. 2. Colloq. To tamper; to waste time. 3. Archaic. To act as a jester.”

Those who accept inspiration as their standard can better discern concerning themselves and others by observing the meaning and use of the term as used in scripture.

Without Reason: Lack Of Commonsense Perception

Jesus referred to some hypocritical Pharisees who criticized Him for not keeping their traditions as fools (Luke 11:40). The same term was used in describing a covetous man who trusted in the abundance of his possessions, without regard for God, others, or eternity (Luke 12:20). The Greek word translated fool in these references is aphron.

Aphron “signifies without reason (a negative, phren the mind), want of mental sanity and sobriety, a reckless and inconsiderate habit of mind (Hort), or the lack of commonsense perception of the reality of things natural and spiritual . . . or the imprudent ordering of one’s life in regard to salvation” (G. Vos, in Hasting’s Bible Dictionary); it is mostly translated “foolish” or “foolish ones” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary of N. T. Words, pp. 113-114).

In both cases mentioned above, the hypocritical Pharisees and the covetous man, there was present a reckless (illogical) reasoning, a lack of commonsense perception concerning things material and spiritual, and this “foolish” thinking was ordering their lives. Jesus said they were “fools” (aphron).

In our generation, as in theirs, there are religious people who are often found attacking (opposing) truth and trying to establish their own way with sophistry and wanton reason. Notice some examples.

One is baptized in order to be saved, for the remission of sins (Mk. 16:15-16; Acts 2:38; 22:16). “But, Jesus said he that believeth not shall be damned and didn’t say he that is not baptized shall be damned!” (Logic suggests that when two conditions of salvation are stated, one doesn’t have to disobey both to be damned – just one will be enough.) “For the remission of sins in Acts 2:38 means `because of.”‘ (Then “repentance” is also “because of.”) “What if one is killed in a wreck on his way to be baptized?” (What if one is killed on his way to faith or repentance?) “What about the thief on the cross?” (How could he be an example of the “new birth” when he lived and died before the Great Commission which commanded baptism in the name of Christ went into effect?)

There is one body (Eph. 4:4; 1 Cor. 12:12-14) or church (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23). “But, our fathers and thousands in every age believed in `many churches’!” (How can this alter God’s word?) “Jesus is the vine and churches are the branches (Jno. 15:1-6).” (The text says “ye,” v. 5; “a man,” v. 6, constitutes the branches.) “Rev. 1:4 speaks of the `seven churches of Asia’, so seven or seven hundred it doesn’t matter!” (The seven churches of Asia were congregations, located in named cities – v. 11, and all subject to the same teaching [“of the one Spirit” 1:7, 11, 17, 29, 2:6, 13, 22].)

“And whatever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by Him” (Col. 3:17). “But, I think if a thing is a good work, whether the Lord authorizes it or not, it will be acceptable.” (Regardless of human thought, it still can not be “of faith” [Rom. 10:17], “of Truth” [Jn. 17:17], or “in the name of the Lord Jesus.”) “Our fellowship hall, ballfield and team, kindergarten, school, Society, Institution, Camp, etc. are `good works’ and God’s word doesn’t say ‘thou shah not.'” (He does, however, tell us not to go beyond what is written, add to or take from it [1 Cor. 4:6; Gal. 1:8; Rev. 22:18-19].)

“Take heed and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth” (Lk. 12:15). “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33). “I just can’t neglect my business, position, recreation, retirement, fun, etc. for Bible Study, Church, and personal evangelism. Surely, God would not expect me to do this!” (Look once again at the man the Lord called a fool in Luke 12:20.)

“Preacher! You are talking about me. I make these arguments and so act. Are you saying I’m a fool?” If you are not, you will be able to discern your true condition the truth – and properly order your life.

Morally Worthless

“Did Jesus say something about calling one a fool?” Jesus did, indeed, say “. . . whosoever shall say to his brother Raca, shall be in danger of the Council, but whosoever shall say, Thou fool (morns – Gk.), shall be in danger of hell fire” (Matt. 5:22).

Morns (fool): “Here the word means normally worthless, a scoundrel, a more serious reproach than `Raca.’ The latter scorns a man’s mind and calls him stupid; `morns’ scorns his heart and character . . .” (Vine’s, Expository Dictionary of N. T. Words, p. 114).

Man cannot look into the heart of his fellows and pass sentence upon them; only the Lord can do this. Man is forbidden to thus do. When the Lord, however, declares someone morns, that person is truly that kind of fool, a morally worthless person. Jesus used this term in pronouncing woes upon the tradition bound, hypocritical scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 23:17, 19) and the virgins that “took no oil with them”, being found unprepared when the bridegroom came (Matt. 25:2, 3, 8). Paul and his fellowworkers were thus viewed in the eyes of their opponents (1 Cor. 4:10).

From the use and meaning of this word in Scripture we can see the depth to which those sink who act unreasonably, without common sense perception (fool aphron), and how the Lord sees them.

Not Understand

Anoetos is another Greek word translated “fool” in scripture and signifies “not understanding.” Jesus said, “O fools, and slow of heart to believe . .” (Luke 24:25). In Rom. 1:21, the word is translated “foolish” heart, and the Galatians were said to be “foolish” (Gal. 3:1, 3). All of us are often “foolish” from this standpoint, but should study to understand. If we do not, we will soon be acting foolishly (aphron) and become morally worthless (morns) before God.

“I may be a fool in the eyes of Bible believers, but how do I know the Bible is reliable or that there is a God who cares?” “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1).

Truth Magazine XXIV: 40, pp. 641, 651
October 9, 1980

By Dudley Ross Spears

In most all of the discussions over the last several years, the divisive question of institutionalism and centralization has involved the work a local church must do. While the question has always been about Biblical authority the work of the local church has been a vehicle for expressing different attitudes toward Bible authority.

The work of the local church to many people in the church consists of just about “any good work” the brethren can think of – without qualification! This includes the general relief of suffering humanity, improving ghetto conditions, eliminating illiteracy, taking off excess weight (paging Ira North and the “slimnastics” program of the Madison church of Christ), and lots and lots of social programs. Kitchens in the church building indicate that some think the work of the church can be expedited by the culinary arts. With the influx of “Family Life Centers” which are nothing but gymnasiums with additional facilities some seem to think that through physical exercise and competitive sports the work of the church can be accomplished. I know of one church of Christ (?) that offers a modified version of a “lonely hearts club.”

The only way to know what the work of the local church is is to read what God has revealed about it. Has the Lord said anything about the work He wants local churches to do? If not, there is nothing to study. If so, we must operate within those things He has revealed. (Read 2 John 9-10; 1 Cor. 4:6; Acts 15:24). God’s mind and His eternal purpose are manifested to the high order of “principalities and powers in heavenly places” through the church. (Eph. 3:10).

By definition, the local church is the saved people who meet together in a specific locality to do the work God has assigned the church. The local church is the place where worship is collectively offered by Christians to God. The local church is a body of the saved who agree to work together under a qualified leadership which they select and who are called “elders” or “pastors” in the New Testament. These same people pool their financial resources in order to achieve their common work. Basically, the local church is a cooperative of the saved who are dedicated to doing God’s work in God’s way.

To further study this, look briefly at some definitions of the word church. Edward D. Morris wrote, “Kuriakos: The term Church, (German kirche; Scotch, kirk; and the Teutonic and Scandinavian languages generally) is derived from the Greek word kuriakos, . . . a derivative from kurios. It came, however, to be employed at an early date to designate the religious organization inhabiting such a building, and engaging statedly in such joint devotions; and this is the use and meaning here to be retained.”

Again, he says of Ekklesia. “The term applied in classic Greek to any assembly of persons called out, or called :ogether, for any specific purpose (Acts 19:32, 39), this :erm came early to designate a religious or a Christian assembly, and such an assembly, not as convened on a single occasion, but rather as in some way organized and having permanent existence.”

Morris says of the word Sunagoga, “The same transition appears in the parallel word, sunagoga, often employed in the Septuagint like ekklesia, to describe not merely the place of assembling, but a company of persons brought together for religious purposes, thus gradually coming to indicate a permanent religious congregation.”

These quotes are from Ecclesiology, Charles Scribners’ Sons, 1890, pages 13-14.

The definition given earlier in this paper is here defended. The local church is organized after a definite pattern. It is God’s divine order. It was organized to have permanent existence. Paul wrote to Titus and told him he left him (Titus) in Crete to “set in order things wanting and ordain elders in every city.” (Titus 1:5). When a thing is set “in order” it is organized. It becomes “set” and therefore is not merely an overnight thought. While Paul was telling Titus that things needed to be brought back to a good state of repair, he also makes us come to the inevitable conclusion that the church is a set order.

To the church in Colossae, Paul wrote of his joy in seeing their “order.” (Col. 2:5). This is a word that signifies a definite organization. W.E. Vine says, “. . . is used in Luke 1:8 of the fixed succession of priests; of due order, in contrast to confusion, in the gatherings of a local church, 1 Cor. 13:40); of the general condition of such, Col. 2:5 (some give it a military significance here). – Expository Dictionary.

The local church is to be under qualified elders where they oversee the work of that -one local church. (1 Pet. 5:2-3; Acts 14:23). When you study Acts 14:23 in connection with Titus 1:5 you can come to the right conclusion that God intends for every city where there is a local church to have elders in every local church in every city. The oversight of the elders of those local congregations is limited to the congregation that selected them to oversee. They have no authority over any part of the work, worship, lives or membership of other congregations.

The local church is to finance its own work and make up those finances by the members contributing regularly into a common treasury. (Acts 2:42, 44; 4:34-35; 1 Cor. 16:1-2). These passages teach that on the Lord’s Day, connected with other items of worship, each member is to give as he or she has been prospered, cheerfully and liberally, that the work (all of it) may be financed.

The work assigned to each local church is the same. The degree of responsibility in each local church is based on the same principle, viz., ability and opportunity which determine the responsibility. There is to be an equality in this respect among all congregations. Paul writes the local church at Corinth and tells them, “For if the readiness is present, it is acceptable according to what a man has, not according to what he does not have. For this is not for the case of others and for your affliction, but by way of equality.” (2 Cor. 8:12, 13, NASB).

The work of the local church consists of three things. The first is evangelism – causing the gospel to be preached. (1 Tim. 3:16; 1 Thess. 1:7-8; Phil. 1:5; 2:14-16). These verses teach that it is the local church that is given the duty of causing the gospel to be preached. Churches of the first century set up a pattern in that they either sent a preacher (Acts 11:22) or they sent directly to a preacher. (Phil. 4:13-17). This is the way they did it then – it should be done that way always. One writer comments, “Here, too, we see the simple manner in which the church in Philippi joined with Paul in the work of preaching the gospel. There was no `missionary society’ in evidence, and none was needed to accomplish the work the Lord has authorized the church to do. When men become dissatisfied with God’s arrangement and set up one of their own, they have already crossed the threshold to apostasy. Let us be satisfied with the Lord’s manner of doing things.” Annual Lesson Commentary, Gospel Advocate Co. 1946, page 341.

The local church is to do benevolent work, viz., relieving the physical needs and sufferings of those who are legitimate charges of the church. (1 Tim. 5:16; Acts 6:1-6). Churches of Christ in the first century provided for the needs of their own members when those members were in need. (Acts 2:44; 4:35; 6:1-6 and others).

The work of edification completes what the Lord wants local churches of Christ to do. This edification is self edification. (Acts 9:31). This is done by the use of teachers and preachers who are to instruct others in the word of God. Both men and women are to teach the word to members of the church. (2 Tim. 2:2). Elders are to feed the flock. (Acts 20:28). This makes the church grow stronger.

There is a conspicuous absence of evidence that the Lord intends for local churches to engage in politics, social reforms, athletic competition, or other recreational activities. I cannot read any Biblical injunction that would authorize local churches to sponsor bowling teams, softball teams, hay rides, banquets or craft classes. Yet I read almost daily of some local churches that think they are still the Lord’s churches engaging vehemently in these things.

There is no evidence I have found where one local church ever is authorized to operate through anything other than its own membership and with its own resource. Yet some local churches that evidently think they still belong to Christ try to work through human organizations of all sorts. Others try to operate through other “sponsoring” congregations which amalgamate the work of all the churches under the oversight of one church. Such practices are wrong for they destroy the identity of the church.

When one church oversees a work to which all local churches have the same obligation, and which is financed by them all, the overseeing church becomes agent for others. This destroys equality. When one church is the agent for many churches, the agent church must be subject to the principal. The independence of churches is ruined. The “sponsoring church” depends on contributing churches for money and the contributing churches depend on the sponsoring church for oversight of the work. If that does not destroy independence I fail to see how it could be done.

Years ago I read in an old Gospel Advocate, “Brethren, the word of God is still the seed of the kingdom. If we want this cooperation of churches and organizations, let us then plant the seed and be satisfied with the crop God raises.” Those are excellent sentiments today. Following that formula will bring us back to doing God’s work in the local churches the way God directs.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 39, pp. 634-635
October 2, 1980

By Dennis C. Abernathy

It is good for us to study the cases of conversion in the Acts of the Apostles. Not only will it help us dispel many false and peculiar notions, but it will show us the way God has outlined for us to be saved. In this article, we wish to explore the conversion of a man who by occupation was a jailor. The basic text will be Acts 16:16-34 but let us begin with verse 9 and see the beginning of the account.

We find Paul and Silas on their second missionary journey; while at Troas, a vision appeared to Paul in the night. In this vision, Paul saw a “man of Macedonia”. This man pleaded with Paul to “come over into Macedonia, and help us.” From that vision, they “assuredly gathered that the Lord had called them for to preach the gospel unto them” (v. 10). Those people needed help (just as people today need help). Paul and Silas realized what they needed, just as we realize what people need today – the Gospel (Rom. 1:16)!

In verse 11, we see them leaving Troas and coming to the city of Philippi, a Roman colony and capital or chief city of Macedonia (v. 12). In verses 13-15, we read of the conversion of Lydia and her household. Paul and Silas were certainly doing nothing out of the way, exciting the people, or in any way disturbing the peace of the city.

They continued in the city and to worship with those by the riverside. One day, they were on their way to the place of prayer when they met an “unfortunate damsel” (v. 16). She was possessed with a demon. We might say she was in double-bondage; in bondage to the demon as well as her masters (those who were using her for gain). They were making merchandise of her misfortune. (Ah! but what the love of money will make one do!) This damsel began to follow them and to give testimony concerning them. What she said was true and she continued to do it for many days. It may be that she said it in a sarcastic way, in a way to stir up prejudice, or in order to make gain for her masters, but whatever, Paul stood it as long as he could. He was “grieved” or “greatly annoyed.” By the authority of Christ he cast out the evil spirit. This was in perfect harmony with the promise to the apostles in Mark 16:17. Paul was not going to be in alliance with demons. God did not need that kind of testimony (read Luke 4:41).

This upset the damsel’s masters to no end. They saw that their gain was gone; now they would seek revenge, so they dragged them to the marketplace before the rulers. There, they accused them falsely (they never stated the matter of casting out the demon) by stating that they were preaching a new religion (which was forbidden by Roman law). Do you believe these greedy men were concerned about the Roman law and religion? Certainly not! They had lost their source of income and were trying to discredit Paul and Silas any way they could. So they gave a very patriotic speech in which they became pious and loyal! What a farce! They gave Paul and Silas no opportunity to make a defense, of that, Paul later complained (v. 37). They then tore off their clothes and had them beaten with rods. We do not know how much they were beaten; it just says “many blows or stripes.” Paul said in 2 Corinthians 11:25, “Thrice was I beaten with rods.”

After they had beaten them, they threw them into prison, yea, even into the “inner prison.” Not only did they throw them into this dungeon, but they put them in the stocks as well. They were treated as the worst of criminals, and all unjustly. Now just picture in your mind, if you will, the plight of Paul and Silas. They are in stocks in this Roman dungeon, with their backs beaten, bruised, and bleeding, simply for doing the Lord’s will.

But they now take their case to a higher court. They go to God. It was about midnight when they began “praying and singing hymns of praise to God” (v. 25). This was quite an unusual sound to be heard in a heathen prison. Paul and Silas were “rejoicing in their sufferings for the Master.” They were not cast down or depressed and complaining. They knew they could pray and sing praise unto God anytime and anywhere. Verse 25 tells us “and the prisoners were listening to them.” Think of the impression made upon their minds. In such a condition, they could still have such a faith in God! But, my dear friend and good reader, not only did the prisoners hear, but God Almighty and His Son, for whom they were suffering, in like manner heard them.

In verse 26, God’s vindication and a great earthquake is recorded. It shook the prison to its very foundations. The chains and stocks were thrown off, the doors thrown open. All of this awoke the jailor, and he thought the prisoners had all escaped, so he was going to take his own life. He was in charge of them and Roman law held him responsible with his life. Paul saw what the jailor was about to do, and loudly cried out to him, “Do yourself no harm, for we are all here” (v. 28). The jailor then came in before them trembling. His attitude toward Paul, Silas, and God, had changed. No longer are they treated as the worst of criminals, but he brought them out of the dungeon and referred to them as “sirs”. He then asked them a very profound question. “What must I do to be saved?” He was concerned about the salvation of his soul from divine condemnation. He was not referring to being saved from the earthquake – it had already passed. He was not concerned about being saved from the Roman penalty – all the prisoners were there. He was not concerned about being saved from the wrath of the Roman gods – he certainly would not have inquired of Paul and Silas for information about them.

This is a very personal question. It is a question you and I must ask. What must I do? Not what must God do! Not what must Christ do! Not what must the Holy Spirit do! No, they have already done their parts (made salvation possible). Neither, was it “What must I feel?”

We now turn our attention to the answer given to this trembling jailor. “And they said, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household” (v. 31). They started with this man where they found him. He was a pagan; he knew nothing of the Lord. No doubt, the same was true of him as was with the man in John 9:36, “He answered and said, And who is He, Lord,. that I may believe in him?” So next they “spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house” (v. 32). This was done in order that he might believe on the Lord (Rom. 10:17). It is clearly implied in (v. 33) that he had repented. Then, in verse 33, we read that he and his household were baptized. They did not wait for a “baptismal service” a month later; it was perforrhed that “very hour of the night.” This was done somewhere between the time he brought them out of the prison and into his house. Somewhere along that route they found water and he baptized them (v. 30, 33-34).

Some use this account (v. 31) to teach “salvation by faith only.” But it does not so teach, except in the vain imaginations of men. Paul told the jailor to believe on the Lord and he should be saved, but of course he meant for him to believe with the completed faith; hence, he baptized him the same hour of the night; then, and not till then; is it said that the “jailor rejoiced, beliveing in God with all his house.” Also, Paul, you remember, is emphatic in teaching that men are “made free from sin” when they have “obeyed from the heart” the form of doctrine (Rom. 6). And Peter, as well, said that we “purify our souls” in “obeying the truth” (1 Pet. 1:22). Hence, we see neither of them ever taught that a man is saved by faith before obedience; but countrariwise, one must do as the Lord taught (Mk. 16:16; Jn. 3:5).

Paul could now more fully realize the call of the man from Macedonia. Also, he could see the wisdom of God. His experience just related agreed with his further instruction. “Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension, shall guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:6-7).

Truth Magazine XXIV: 39, pp. 632-633
October 2, 1980

By Daniel M. King

The above title was the heading for an article that appeared in the July 27, 1980 issue of the Chicago Tribune Magazine and featured a discussion of “The Big Business of TV Evangelism.” I was not so amazed at some of the figures as I suppose some people may have been. Most of us who know anything of the scriptural teaching regarding the raising of funds for the church’s work are naturally skeptical about the big promotions and fund-raising drives and begging campaigns that constantly go on, masterminded by these big-time promoters who always sound as though they are bitten by the bug of poverty. Too, they identify their schemes and antics as the “work of God” and those who help them by sending in gifts and offerings as their “partners in the work of the Lord.” The real truth is that these men are only enriching themselves and their great religious empires and enlarging and filling up their own personal “barns” in order to build greater. The humble efforts of the apostles look pretty puny in the light of their work: the twelve never attempted to beg from the community or to take up “love offerings” from the people of the neighborhood who just happened to be listening when they preached. They lived “of the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:14), but in some cases refused even to do that (1 Cor. 9:18). At all events, they did not live lavishly or attempt to build great worldly monuments to themselves – but to enshrine in the hearts of others their risen Lord Jesus Christ. They were betimes supported by the churches they had started in different locales as they preached the word elsewhere (2 Cor. 11:8; Phil. 4:16), but it was the churches that provided their support. They were not leeches upon the ones who heard them and they never gave the slightest impression by their acts or words that they had intention of ever being so.

Yet it is easy to see that these modern promoters and TV evangelists of the flamboyant stripe are quite different. As an instance, I submit for your consideration the person of the “Reverend” Robert H. Schuller. The article in the Tribune pictured him standing in his recently completed $18 million “Crystal Cathedral,” a 12-story glass skyscraper-church building, “a structure that rivals Disneyland’s snow capped concrete Matterhorn for dominance of California’s otherwise undistinguished Orange County Landscape” (Ronald Yates). Schuller began building a following back in 1955 when he “pioneered drive-in religion from atop the snack-bar roof of an Orange County outdoor theater.” The cathedral was the result of what Schuller called “possibility thinking”: “Nothing is impossible if you believe in yourself’ (Emphasis mind, DHK). The 55 year old Schuller is pictured standing atop his opulent red Spanish marble altar in his marble pulpit, with a caption beneath that reads: “I don’t jam the Bible down people’s throats. I believe in the Bible, but if people want Bible preaching, they can get it elsewhere.” Whereupon, Ronald Yates comments, “And what you hear is no ordinary Bible-thumping sermon. There are no references to Satan, sin, or damnation. Nor is there any mention of such social ills as racism, sexism, crime, or corruption. It’s all strictly noncontroversial. And references to the Bible itself are rare.”

Not all of these big-time Billy Sunday types fit this description of Schuller. Some use more Bible than others; some condemn some present-day sins more than others; some are less open in their talk about money than others. But the name of the game is money and prestige nonetheless. As Richard P. McBrien, professor of theology at Boston College, is quoted as saying: “These TV preachers can’t tell me they’re serious about Christianity when they’re driving around town in limousines. The money is their Achilles’ heel.” Pat Robertson of the “700 Club” reigns over a $58 million-a-year electronic ministry; Rex Humbard has his Cathedral ‘of Tomorrow with its boasted “indoor cross,” the largest indoor cross in the world; Jerry Falwell and his ministry earn $50 million a year; Billy Graham’s Crusades realize about $30 million a year; Oral Roberts, with his prime-time specials, etc., generates about $60 million a year. No doubt about it, this is big business, and makes for its biggest stars some of the biggest money around. It is a sure key into the lap of luxury for the man with the business-sense and the willingness to embrace people of many different views without making any waves or rocking any boats or stirring up any criticism that would ruin the ratings or hurt the revenues.

And with the turn that many churches of Christ have been taking lately we may confidently expect to see some of these characters and their chicanery beginning to crop up among us soon. As a matter of fact, anybody who knows anything about “what is” is already aware that brother Ira North, flamboyant minister of the Madison Church of Christ and editor of the Gospel Advocate, fits the description of the only kind of promoter that could survive in the “mainstream” of the “mainline” churches at the present moment. His willingness to compromise is well known from the instance connected with the ecumenical memorial that he had to do with, in which he and a Catholic priest along with a Jewish Rabbi were given the main responsibilities for its planning and development for the city of Nashville. The thing drew so much criticism that he finally resigned from it, without apology or repentance, with the excuse that he was simply “too busy” with other things to take care of it. His desire for attention was almost a regular feature of the Nashville landscape; he was seen riding a motorcycle to the church meeting-place in bright red suits often enough that it was the talk of the town; he sported diamond rings on his hands, and was always in the middle of a new promotion of some sort or another: “We’re going to have the biggest Sunday school here at Madison in the history of the churches of Christ next Sunday.” “Our goal is 6000 here at Madison next Sunday” (or some such astronomical figure, DHK). His newest device is the “Amazing Grace Bible Class,” which features his smiling face and assorted pleasantries, and the weekly giving away of Bibles as rewards to those who answer tricky Bible questions. The show airs on TV stations all around the country and has a host of enthusiastic watchers. The center of focus, as well might be expected, is Ira North the promoter.

Now we all know that Ira has taken a lot of criticism in the past and likely will yet in the future – and most of it for good reasons. But I should think that we will all probably look back someday and remember how extremely mild were the antics of Ira North when we view them from the perspective of the new generation that is now “the seed yet in the husk” and will take his place someday. I am sure that he will be seen as one who prepared the way for men and methods still undreamt-of in the churches. It will be said that he missed some of the best techniques and that his days were the days of moderation, the moderation of expediency. There were lines that he could not cross, that even he – dared not cross. And though I am neither a prophet nor a prophet’s son, with the attitudes currently being what they are in the many of the churches and among many of the preachers, I would venture to say that we are not far from the day when men will arise from our ranks who will not even stop where he stopped. And some of our brethren will see the success of their methods and the numbers that they draw and will rethink their attitudes about such matters. Then the Ethic of Utility will have the final say.

Already Pat Boone, under the influence of his neopentecostal heresy, has made appearances on several programs as the celebrity-guest of different big-name TV evangelists, thus endorsing their doctrines and their methods. In addition, Don Finto of the avant-garde Belmont Church of Christ has made at least one appearance on such a show, showing his endorsement. “When will we get a show of our own?” (I can almost hear some brethren asking). “Herald of Truth is not flashy or dazzling enough, it has never drawn enough attention (except for opposition from the “antis”); and it has relied for support upon thousands of congregations, support that has ebbed and flowed because of the controversies that have troubled it in the past. What we need is a man with the flash and dazzle of an Oral Roberts or a Rex Humbard! Someone who can generate the cash-flow and put the church on the map!”

I am fully aware that some of what we have had to say above lies entirely in the realm of speculation about what may happen. All the same, conditions are certainly ripe for some of them to take place. In closing, I would like to make a few suggestions of some lessons that we can draw from this foolishness and from Bible principles which pertain directly to attitudes that could characterize a few among us: (1) We might rethink many of the ideas that we have come to cherish about what an “ideal preacher” is. Some of us expect him to be flashily and flamboyant, smiling and debonaire, tall, dark and handsome, with winsome personality; he must have a touch of eloquence and a flair for the dramatic. He must offend no one. His style must be always gracious and never militant. He must be a promoter and a builder, a virtual “spark-plug” for the congregation with which he labors. His clothing must always be stylish and fashionable, a pace-setter for the community. What we are describing here, I think you can see, is a preacher after the order of the TV evangelists that are coming into multitudes of homes and with which we think our men should compete. But they cannot and should not make the attempt. The Hollywood-inspired preachers generally have little or no concern for Bible authority, but have a plentiful supply of concern for what will help to “rake in the cash.” If men who labor among us ever reach the low point at which they can give money a thought when it comes to what they preach and how they preach – then it will be a sad day for the church of the Lord.

Most everyone who ever met David Lipscomb said that he was about the ugliest man they ever saw. He wore home-spun clothes at a time and in a place when and where such was clearly outmoded. This is not an endorsement for being either ugly or unfashionable. But it does say that this man who touched the lives of untold thousands and who “being dead yet speaketh” could touch men’s hearts and change men’s lives by the sheer power of the word of God faithfully preached. Paul instructed Timothy (2 Tim. 2:2); “The things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou the faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.” Over and above these God-given qualifications we have not the right to venture others.

(2) At a time when the apostolic example of the collection being taken up on the first day of the week for the ongoing work of the church is taking a real beating in the minds of some people, it evinces that this is really the only way that the preaching of the gospel can be carried out without its lying under a constant cloud of suspicion. The ethic of utility notwithstanding, those who preach the gospel cannot be truly effective if the public considers them mercenary in their motives. Yet that is precisely what comes across when the hat or basket is being perpetually passed or when the speaker on a broadcast is perennially asking for donations. The freewill offering of the saints on the first day of the week should be sufficient to accomplish the inauspicious purposes that God has for His people, and certainly was so in the days when the gospel was sent into all the world without the aid of modern contrivances (1 Cor. 16:1-2; Phil.4:16; Col. 1:23). And when it was done no one could ever voice the objection that it was accomplished at public expense and to enrich those who did the preaching. Their humble ways and open honesty was absolutely above reproach, “taking thought for things honorable not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men” (2 Cor. 8:21).

(3) We must learn the lesson that the opulence and finery of these starry-eyed dreamers is only another aspect of a this-world-oriented-religion. The building of great shrines and monuments and the establishing of TV networks and worldly businesses is all a part of what is to perish when this world is consumed by fire (2 Pet. 3:10). Yet we have some among our brethren who are set on erecting such cathedrals “up to the heavens,” costing millions of dollars and forcing them into all sorts of escapades to raise the monies necessary to pay off loans for such edifices. Then they must lower the standards of morality and Christianity in order to fill up these huge houses with the ungodly and reprobates of every kind – all to make a big impression upon the world. If they were making saints out of these sinners it would be an entirely different thing, but as a matter of fact that is not what is happening. Rather, the church of Christ is being turned into no more than a glorified social club and its meeting-house into no more than a recreation and entertainment center. Brethren who meet in humble houses to worship their master can take consolation in the promise of God that there are mansions that await His people if they have the patience to endure and not to be side-tracked by things of only temporal import: “Our citizenship is in heaven . . .” (Phil. 3:20). We are not to “mind earthly things” (Phil. 3:19) or “desire to make a fair show in the flesh” (Gal. 6:12).

(4) In the struggle to compete with these Hollywood style preachers that some among us have essayed to make, we must not forget that the power of the gospel is both to draw and to repel. “The word or the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). I cannot help but recall the words of the worldly-wise Robert Schuller: “I admit I don’t hold up a Bible. I don’t deliver biblical expositions. I don’t jam the Bible down people’s throats. I believe in the Bible, but if people want Bible preaching, they can get it elsewhere.” Schuller knows what it takes to get and keep a large following and to “rake in the greenbacks.” Schuller and those of his stripe want only to draw people. But the power of the gospel is in its very ability to both draw and repel, to draw those who would have a pure and contrite heart and to repulse those whose interests are only this worldly. Remember that Jesus allowed – yea more, said the precise words that were calculated to turn away the rich young ruler – if his heart and motivations were not pure and absolute (which they turned out not to be, Lk. 18:18-25). Schuller and those like him would never be so straightforward, so strong, so judgmental, but would draw him to them and encourage him to make large gifts and love offerings to help finance their grand schemes.

The heart-breaking and soul-rending truth of this thing is that in the churches of Christ at the present day there are many who preach who would be little able to denounce mercenary and utterly spineless preaching of that type because they fit the job description just about as completely as do some of those who are far more successful at it than they are! Said Ezekiel the prophet of those with whom he contended in his days, namely the false prophets: “When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die, and thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way; that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thy hand” (Ezek. 33:8). We will all make mistakes in our preaching, but whatever we do we had better not make the tragic and irreparable error of failing in the most basic duty of the preacher – failing to preach: to “reprove, rebuke and exhort” (2 Tim. 4:2ff). For saying that we have failed at that is the same as saying that a policeman has failed to police or a runner to run or a teacher to teach. But really nothing is comparable, for no other illustration could possibly embrace the aweful consequences of failing to be the kind of preacher the Lord would have one to be. Only the fierceness-of the fires of eternity could ever bring that reality into its true light; and if the Bible is a true Book and God the author thereof, then the hideousness of that moment will be the greatest and the most unendurable to the one who carried the burden of responsibility for preaching the truth, but dropped the load to dance to the tune of coins jingling in his pockets. “Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow Christians, because you know we who teach will be judged more severely” (Jas. 3:1; Williams’ Translation).

Truth Magazine XXIV: 39, pp. 629-632
October 2, 1980