Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

The people of the Lord are separate from the world; they will never blend in with modern religious denominationalism. We have already seen how the Lord’s people are distinctive with reference to their language and their doctrine. In this final article of this series, we remind our readers that the Lord’s people are also distinctive with reference to their worship.

The First Century Saints Had Distinctive Worship

The church which began at Jerusalem was distinctive in worship. Its worship was unlike that of its religious neighbors in many aspects. The inspired historian wrote that those who had been baptized on the day of Pentecost “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Acts 2:42). Consider the differences in apostolic worship from that of those around them.

Judaism. New Testament worship certainly differed from that of Judaism in a number of ways. The Jews offered animal sacrifice daily at the Temple; too, incense was burned. The early church had no animal sacrifices to offer as a part of its congregational assembly; they burned no incense. As a matter of fact, the sacrifice of animals was replaced with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Whereas animal sacrifices were offered daily in the Temple, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary was an all-sufficient payment for the sins of the world; being all-sufficient, there was no need for continual offerings day after day.

The worship which the Lord’s people offered also separated them from Judaism; the Jews had no Lord’s supper – a memorial to the sacrifice of Christ; they did not preach the apostles’ doctrine; instead, they preached the Law of Moses. The early church did not observe the ceremonial law of cleanness. We can, therefore, conclude that the early church was easily distinguishable from Judaism in the worship which was offered.

Paganism. The worship of paganism did not have uniformity; that which was offered in one place to one god was different from that which was offered in another place to another god. Yet, the worship of paganism was distinctive from Judaism and Christianity. Perhaps the most obvious difference was in reference to the gods who were worshiped. Christians worship the true God; pagans worshiped a plurality of gods. Paganism was polytheistic and, therefore, differed from the early church.

The acts of worship of paganism were different from that of the Christians. For example, certain religions in Corinth committed fornication as an act of worship to their god. Other pagans burned their own children in fire as an act of worship to god. Consequently, we can see how distinctive the worship of the New Testament was when compared to paganism of the first century.

The Worship of Twentieth Century Saints Is Distinctive

Even as the worship of the first century church was distinctive from that of first century Judaism and paganism, so also the worship of the twentieth century saints is distinctive from that of its religious neighbors. Let us consider the distinctive nature of the worship of the New Testament church as compared to that of our religious neighbors.

1. The Lord’s Supper. The early church assembled on the first day of every week (1 Cor. 16:1-2) for the purpose of partaking of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:20; Acts 20:7). In partaking of the Lord’s Supper, remembrance was made of what Christ had done for us (1 Cor. 11:26). The items which were used were the fruit of the vine (Matt. 26:29) and unleavened bread (Matt. 26:17, 26).

Whereas the early church and the twentieth century church assembled on the first day of every week to break bread, modern Protestant denominationalism does not partake of the Lord’s Supper on the first day of every week. Some denominations observe the Lord’s Supper monthly, others annually, and still others semi-annually. Some observe the Lord’s Supper in conjunction with a foot washing ceremony. Modern Catholicism, in distinction from Protestantism and the church, celebrates the “mass” every day. Both of these practices are contrary to the Lord’s revelation; consequently those who are simply following New Testament Christianity are distinctive with reference to the frequency of observing the Lord’s Supper.

The purpose for which the early church assembled to break bread is different also from that of Roman Catholicism. The New Testament church observed the Lord’s Supper as a memorial to the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 11:24-25). Catholicism celebrates the mass as a daily sacrifice of the body of Jesus which atones for venial sins and preserves one from committing mortal sins. The New Testament church is distinctive from the world of Catholicism in this respect.

2. Singing. The worship of the New Testament church in celebration to God is just as distinctive in the twentieth century as it was in the first century. The first century Christians had congregational singing (1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). There is no evidence that the early church had a choir which did the singing for the entire congregation. Rather, each individual Christian lifted his voice in praise and adoration to God.

Modern worship services manifest several apostasies in worship with reference to singing. The most obvious apostasy is that of appointing a special singing group which does the singing for the entire group. Choirs and choruses are prevalent in many religious denominations today. Another apostasy in reference to the worship of God through song is the usage of mechanical instruments of music in connection with singing. There is no book, chapter, and verse authorizing the usage of mechanical instruments of music in worship; nevertheless, brethren have forced them on other brethren causing a division in the body of Christ. A more recent apostasy which is showing itself in many denominations and some liberal churches of the Lord is the usage of specialized singing groups as a means of drawing a crowd to worship. There is no authority for drawing a crowd to the assembly to hear someone entertain us with his singing ability.

The Lord’s people will continue to be distinctive in the kind of worship which they offer. The simplicity of singing praises to God without mechanical accompaniment is considered strange to our religious neighbors. That we have no special singing groups to entertain us is unusual to our neighbors. Even today, the worship of the New Testament church is distinctive with reference to its singing.

3. Giving. The early church raised funds to preach the gospel through first day of the week contributions (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Each member gave as he was prospered, cheerfully, without grudging and not of necessity (2 Cor. 9:6-7). This was the manner in which funds were raised for the work of the church in the first century.

Modern religious groups raise their funds through begging, raffles, pot luck dinners, bingo games (a form of gambling), church owned businesses, and many other methods. The contributions taken in denominations are taken in at every assembly; in some assemblies several contributions are taken. The New Testament church continues to be different from that of its religious neighbors with reference to its manner of raising funds. Frequently I have to explain to people why our contributions are so high when compared to that of our religious neighbors. They cannot understand high contributions without many begging appeals for money. A group of saints committed to the support of the gospel preaching is unique even today.

4. Prayer. The approach of God through prayer is not unique. Just about every religious group offers prayer to God. What made the prayer of the first century church unique was that they approached the throne of grace through their mediator Jesus Christ (cf. Jn. 16:13-14). They recognized their need for someone to stand between them and God, one who could and would plead their case (1 Jn. 2:1). Hence, the first century saints prayed to God through Christ.

This is still unique to some extent. Catholics pray to God through Mary. A mediator other than Jesus is used, a mere human being. Ecumenical circles pray to God directly without praying through Christ. They are concerned that they not offend their Jewish friends who do not believe in Jesus; consequently, a concerted effort is made not to mention Jesus’ name when offering prayer to God. Certainly the prayers of the saints are distinctive when compared to the prayers offered by ecumenical disciples and Catholics.

Let Us Remain Distinctive

I do not foresee the religious world around us making drastic changes in their practices in order to comply with the revelation of God. Until that is the case, the people of God will be as distinctive from the religious world around us as the first century saints were from the religious world around them.

There can be no compromise with sinful departures from God’s revelation. The man who departs from God’s revealed pattern cannot be fellowshipped (2 Jn. 9-11; 2 Thess. 3:14). The man who is presently involved with these religious denominations needs to obey the instructions of the apostle Paul; he wrote,

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1).

Those who are attending religious denominations need to leave those denominations to become a part of the church of God, the blood-bought body of Christ. Those who are presently a part of the New Testament church need to remember that they have nothing in common with modern religious denominationalism; joint participation with them reflects a compromising spirit; failure to oppose their apostasies is unfaithfulness to the Lord.

However, the man who expresses their apostasies will be viewed as a different person to the rest of the world; indeed, he will be considered a member of a sect in exactly the same manner as the first century saints were considered a sect (Acts 28:22). Let us be content to stand for God’s word; by so doing, we shall continue to be a peculiar people.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 35, pp. 563-565
September 4, 1980

By Eugene Crawley

Light and darkness are contrasted a number of times in the word of God, as are those who follow each. It is a contrast rather than a comparison, because there is no likeness of the two. One is opposed to the other, and the one loving one also hates the other. The person who loves truth hates darkness (error). “Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way” (Psalm 119:104); and the one who loves darkness hates light, “For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light . . .” (John 3:20).

Jesus had somewhat to say about this throughout His earthly ministry. He made it very plain in regard to those who loved the truth (or light), as well as those who loved error (or darkness) when He said, “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God” (John 3:19-21). From this we can plainly see why some love darkness, and refuse to come to the light. Those who do evil, who walk in darkness, and engage in that which is not the truth, love the cover of darkness, and refuse to come to the light.

When one refuses, or even is reluctant to come to the light, to have the light of God’s word turned upon him and his teaching, it is evident that he is afraid of reproof, and fears (or knows) that his teaching will not stand the test. On the other hand, that person who loves the truth above all else, and wants nothing else, cometh to the light, for he has nothing to fear. For even if he is wrong, he needs, and wants, to know it; whereas when he is right everyone needs to know it. Thus, he cometh to the light, and does so continually that he continue to be right.

The conclusion then must be this: Those who refuse to come to the light, are not willing to defend publicly their actions and teaching, well know that they cannot stand the light of God’s word lest they be reproved. This should be cause enough for those who find themselves among such, to come out from among them – to come to the light come to that which does not fear investigation, and stand upon the truth, and stand for it!

Truth prospers when it “cometh to the light”; error does not, and thus must remain in darkness, under cover, and be kept quiet. Which do you love: light or darkness? Will your teaching and practice stand the light of God’s word? Are you willing to come to the light, and allow your works to be made manifest? “But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light” (Eph. 5:13).

Could this be why some brethren attend Bible classes so rarely where the word of God is taught and stressed? Could it be that they do not want to see themselves as they really are, and as they appear in the sight of God? If so, such should remember that sometime it will be too late to come to the light and make amends for that which is lacking in their lives!

“They are of those that rebel against the light; they know not the ways thereof, nor abide in the paths thereof” (Job 24:13).

Truth Magazine XXIV: 35, p. 562
September 4, 1980

By Wallace H. Little

In a 1977 discussion with several Filipino preachers on problems in teaching, I mentioned a series of lessons on “Methods of Teaching.” They thought it would be good for me to return and teach this, providing other preachers agreed. They did. To make the series more suitable, I revised the material, reducing the number of lessons from 13 to 9. Five hundred copies were printed for distribution for attendees. I choose 13 locations where the greatest number of preachers could be reached at minimum expense to them. Other members, including wives, were also welcome to attend. The series required 21 hours of classes over three days in each place. Additionally, I discussed some problems of significance to Filipino brethren. Also, some funds had been sent to me for distribution for specific benevolence cases, although not as massive as in previous years. Another purpose was to lend whatever influence I might have to settle a long-standing dispute among brethren. I planned to preach as I was invited to do so. The trip began on the Lord’s day, 16 March 1980 and ended on Saturday, 21 June 1980. Unlike previous trips, I planned this one with time for me to rest properly.

The results: I was privileged to see 26 baptized into Christ in the various places where I was privileged to preach. This was an unplanned, but certainly joyous additional consequence. 398 preachers, plus a number of others including more than a few preachers’ wives, attended the classes. I had intended sending each of my supporters a copy of the notes I used for the classes, but these are all gone. Toward the end, it was even necessary to ration them so each preacher could have a copy. However, I summarized the notes at the end of the report I sent to my supporters. The classes themselves, plus other teaching and preaching, gave me an average of 30 hours of teaching each week. I missed preaching one Lord’s day when I was ill and was unable to assemble with the saints. Finally, I have written an individual report on each supported man, to be sent to those who are supporting.

Success in helping brethren solve their problems is not yet completely measureable. It will take time to see how much fruit this will bear. I pray this was successful, for the preacher-envy there has been the plague on that work for 15 years. Distribution of benevolence and other financial matters are included in a report to my supporters which contains an audit of these things prepared by a professional in that field, that brethren might be assured proper stewardship has been exercised.

I planned an average expense of $30.00 per day, apart from transportation and miscellaneous costs. It turned out to be closer to $50.00, for several reasons. First, there was an inflation increase of more than 25% from the time I planned the trip until I arrived. Second, one week after I arrived, the government announced a 26% across the board increase on hotel cost and related charges. Third, a similar increase was allowed for restaurants.

I contracted pneumonia, and added to the other expenses, was a stay in the hospital, plus the medicine and doctor bills for it. More importantly, I lost four days of work, and that hurt badly.

Brethren supporting me over-subscribed, which turned out to be fortunate because of the increased costs. Even so, for the last month prior to my departure, I turned back a number of offers of additional financial help. Those funds remaining will be returned to my supporters on a basis proportionate to their financial assistance.

One congregation offered $1500.00 for trip expenses. When I informed these good brethren I already had sufficient, they asked me to use the funds to purchase and distribute Bibles there. This was done so each preacher received at least one Bible in his native dialect. There are 116 major and minor recorded dialects, greatly complicating the teaching problem. The need for dialect Bibles is to permit preachers to teach those whose English is inadequate to this. In this future, I hope more dialect Bibles can be purchased and distributed. The ultimate solution to the language problem is the government’s plan to make the Philippines a bi-lingual nation within a generaion. Tagalong and English will be the two languages. The short term solution is a 3-language interlinear translation based on the 1901. Competent men are presently at work on this. Before the end of 1980, 1 hope to have enough of a sample completed (perhaps the entire book of Matthew) to enable me to make an effective presentation to raise the funds to complete this work and get it into the hands of preachers there.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 34, p. 555
August 28, 1980

By Earl Robertson 

Jude tearfully warns the children of God concerning the character of false teachers who stealthily creep in among them. He informs them that they turn the grace of God into lasciviousness, and will even deny the Father and the Son. Men of this stripe have no intention of doing God’s will, are far removed in identifying with the character of holiness and are sunken to the bottom of slime that they have no compunction of conscience. As Sodom and Gomorrah gave themselves over to fornication and strange flesh, these false teachers are also moral reprobates. Jude says, “Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities” (Jude 8). In spite of the examples of the cities of the Plain, these dreamers dream on!

Moses said the Lord was grieved in his heart at the wickedness and evil imaginations of men (Gen. 6:5, 6). These evil imaginations and thoughts were in the hearts of men! One of the seven things the Lord is said to hate is “an heart that deviseth wicked imaginations” (Prov. 6:18). Peter speaks of “cunningly devised fables” (2 Pet. 1:16) which, being of the wicked one, destroys all that is right. Over against such wickedness, Paul writes, “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think of these things” (Phil. 4:8). What a contrast in God’s thoughts and man’s thoughts!

But Jude affirms these “filthy dreamers” dream on! Peter writes of the same, saying, “Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children” (2 Pet. 2:14). This vivid expression is descriptive of a man unable to look at a woman without lasciviousness in his heart, a clear violation of Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5:28! Such motivation prevented a cessation from sin. As in the gymnasium, they “exercised” or trained their hearts to practice sin! Yes, they dreamed of filth! This is exactly what continues to plague individuals and churches today. Think on the pure, the true and the right.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 34, p. 554
August 28, 1980