Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

The book of Acts records Paul’s journey to Jerusalem during which he brought funds gathered in Galatia, Achaia and Macedonia to relieve the poor among the saints (1 Cor. I6:1-2; 2 Cor. 8-9; Rom. 15:26). When Paul arrived in Jerusalem, the brethren told him of the sentiment among the Christians against Paul because, they were told, he taught Jews to forsake the law of Moses and not to circumcise their children (Acts 21:21). To offset this prejudice against the apostle, the brethren recommended that Paul participate in a purification vow with several other Jewish Christians.

On the seventh day of the purification ceremonies, some Jews from Asia recognized Paul and created a tumult against him charging that he had defiled the holy place by bringing a Gentile into the Temple. This was a lie based on pure assumption; the Asian Jews had seen Trophimus, a Gentile companion of Paul, with him in the city and had assumed that he had taken him into the Temple. However, they proceeded to take him outside the Temple to stone him to death.

Claudius Lysias, the Roman chief captain of the Tower of Antonio (a fortress in the Temple area), rushed down to break up the scene. He saved Paul from being stoned to death. The next day, Paul was tried before the Sanhedrin. During the trial, Paul said, “I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question” (Acts 23:6). This confession of belief in the resurrection caused a division between the Sadducees and Pharisees on the council; the uproar became so great that Claudius Lysias had Paul taken back into the prison for safe-keeping.

The next day, the Jews plotted the murder of Paul. Claudius Lysias learned of the plot and had Paul transferred to Caesarea there Felix, the procurator of Judea (the same position which Pontius Pilate had held some years before) lived. Five days later the Jews went to Caesarea to place charges against Paul. Paul successfully defended himself. Nevertheless, Felix left him in jail for an extended period of time for no just reason.

During the course of Paul’s imprisonment, Felix called for the apostle to hear from him concerning the faith in Christ (Acts 24:24). Paul reasoned with him of righteousness, temperance and the judgement to come. Felix trembled. Nevertheless, he said, “Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee” (Acts 24:25).

Who Was This Felix?

Fortunately, we can learn more about Felix from secular sources. The secular historians add to our information about Felix. Felix was the household slave of Antonia, Claudius Caesar’s mother; he was granted his freedom by Claudius and took Antonius as his forename.

Claudius made a policy of employing such court servants in his administration. Felix was even the brother of the Minister of the Treasury, Pallas, and the husband of a Roman princess descended from Antony and Cleopatra; he therefore had the ear of the central government and a place in higher diplomatic circles (Bo Reicke, The New Testament Era, p. 206).

As a ruler, Felix left somewhat to be desired. Disorders in Palestine mushroomed under his administration. His leadership antagonized Jewish leaders and was, to some degree, responsible for the organizing of the Sicarii (Jewish assassins who were political zealots). “His countryman Tacitus (Hist. v. 9) describes him as using `the powers of a king with the disposition of a slave’ and says (Ann. xii. 54) `he deemed that he might perpetrate any ill deeds with impunity”‘ (G.P. Gould, Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, James Hastings, editor, Vol. I, p. 405). (Note: because of these historical comments, compare Tertullus’ hypocritical remarks about Felix’ rule in Acts 23:2-5.)

Felix, you will recall, had married a Roman princess who was the descendent of Antony and Cleopatra. Yet, when we meet him in Acts 24:24, he is married to Drusilla. When Felix arrived in Caesarea, he was able to conclude another favorable marriage, this time with the beautiful Jewish princess Drusilla (Acts 24:24). Agrippa II allowed his sister to marry the Roman without the usual requirement of circumcision, a sign that he considered the match very advantageous. All this established friendly relationships between the Romans and the Jews in the first two years of Felix’ procuratorship.

Nevertheless, this marriage was one quite contrary to the, law of God. Drusilla had been previously married to Azizus, king of Emesa. Shortly afterward, she was induced to desert her husband by Felix, who employed a Gyprian sorcerer, Simon by name, to carry out his purpose.

Hence, when Paul stepped in the presence of Felix and Drusilla, he stood before two sinners who were living together in a marriage relationship which was displeasing to God. He was able to address two people who had obviously lived a life of hedonism, doing whatever pleased them.

Paul’s Sermon

What would Paul preach to Felix and Drusilla? There are a number of evangelists who would have preached about the love of God, the beauty of two people from such diverse backgrounds living together with love, how that Jews, Romans and Christians all worshiped the same God, or some other innocuous sermon similar to that. However, the scriptures related that Paul reasoned with Felix and Drusilla about “righteousness, temperance, and the judgment to come.”

1. Righteousness. The word dikaiosune can refer to “that divine arrangement. by which God leads men to a state acceptable to him” or “integrity, virtue, purity of life, uprightness, correctness in thinking, feeling, and acting” (Thayer, p. 149). No doubt, Thayer is correct in applying this second definition to Acts 24:25 (based on its close relationship to “self-control”). Hence, Paul addressed Felix and Drusilla about the need for moral purity.

Other comments in the Pauline epistles reflect the kind of teaching which Paul did with reference to moral issues. Study some of Paul’s writings about morality:

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, or idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21).

No doubt, the teaching which Paul did on this occasion was somewhat similar to this. The demand of God for purity of life does not exclude the rich and politically somewhat of this world. The lives of Felix and Drusilla, who were openly living in an adulterous relationship, were’ sinful before God and Paul did not hesitate to preach about God’s demand for purity in life to such people as this.

2. Temperance. The word “temperance” has gone through such an evolution in the English language that a better word can be used to translate egkrateias. “Temperance” became so associated with the Women’s Temperance Union that it is practically synonymous with “abstinence from alcohol.” Originally, the word meant “self-restraint in conduct, expression, indulgence of the appetites, etc.” Egkrateia means “self-control . . . the virtue of one who masters his desires and passions, especially his sensual appetites” (Thayer, pp. 166-167). The English word “self-control” in today’s usage more neatly reproduces the meaning of the original Greek word.

Paul was, therefore, teaching Felix and Drusilla that God requires man to control his passions. This is a lesson needed as much today as at any time in man’s history. Our society has been teaching us, through song and direct doctrinal philosophy, that “if it feels good, do it.” The philosophy of hedonism is that man should practice whatever gives him pleasure. The doctrine of self-control runs counter to that. It teaches that the law of God imposes some restrictions upon man’s conduct which must be recognized and obeyed. Specifically, Felix and Drusilla must control their passions of a sexual nature (i.e., they must break off their adulterous relationship) and any other passion which was causing them to act contrary to God’s revealed law.

3. The Judgment To Come. After revealing that God’s law demands moral purity, Paul confronted Felix and Drusilla with the fact that there is a judgment day coming. Paul preached that “there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust” (Acts 24:15). He preached,

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad (2 Cor. 5:10).

In speaking of the righteous judgment of God, Paul revealed that God

will render to every man according to his deeds: to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: for there is no respect of persons with God (Rom. 2:6-11).

“The judgment day is coming,” Paul told Felix. In explaining the nature of the judgment of God, Paul certainly must have mentioned heaven and hell, the respective eternal abodes of the righteous and the wicked.

Felix’s Reaction

The first reaction of Felix was recorded by Luke when he wrote, “Felix trembled.” The discussion about the judgment day, the eternal separation of the righteous and the wicked, scared Felix. Felix was thoroughly convicted of his sin. He knew what his present relationship with god was and it caused him to tremble. However, being scared is not the same as being saved.

The second reaction of Felix was this statement to Paul: “Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.” Felix postponed obeying the gospel. His was not the reaction of a man who was patiently counting the cost of following Jesus. Rather, his was the reaction of a man who makes his decision to say “no” to Jesus by saying “sometime later.” The fact of the matter is that Felix was not willing to practice the self-control necessary to live a righteous life to be pleasing to God. This is seen by two separate points from Luke’s narrative: (1) Though Felix knew somewhat about Christianity (Acts 24:22), enough to know the prejudice of Judaism against Christianity, he nevertheless refused to grant Paul his freedom by declaring him innocent of the charges placed against him. Rather, he said that he would wait until Lysias came to Caesarea so that he could hear more about the matter. Although it only took the Jewish accusers of Paul five days to come to Caesarea to place their charges against Paul, Lysias could not be brought from Jerusalem to Caesarea for a more thorough examination of Paul in two full years! Hence, Felix did not want to act contrary to Jewish desires in granting Paul his freedom; instead, when he left office, he left Paul in prison as a favor to the Jews (Acts 24:27).

(2) Felix was a man willing to take and anxious to receive a bribe. Luke stated, “He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul, that he might loose him: wherefore he sent for him the oftener, and communed with him” (Acts 24:26). Remembering the statement that Paul had made about bringing alms to his nation (Acts 24:17), Felix supposed that Paul had access to money and made it apparent that he wanted to be bribed in order to give Paul his freedom. Hence, Paul’s sermon about righteousness and self-control left no permanent impact upon Felix. His statement, “Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee,” was not the statement of a man wishing to obey the gospel at some later time in life; it was the statement of one wishing to get rid of the preacher) or the time being.

Conclusion

Felix is one of several cases of non-conversion recorded in the Bible. I should hope that each of us can profit from a study of his mistakes. Dear friend, if you have been thinking about becoming a Christian, do not postpone your obedience to the gospel. There will never be a “convenient season” for any sinners; Satan never did make it easy for a man to renounce his sins and obey the Lord. Rather, the web of sin will just become more and more wrapped around you. Consequently, resolve in your heart to break away from sin this day and begin to serve the Savior.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 48, pp. 771-773
December 6, 1979

By Carol R. Lumpkin

The “new Life” begins with a “birth,” a birth in water and in the Spirit. Jesus, while speaking to Nicodemus, said; “Verily, verily, i say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:5). Peter adds, “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever” (Pet. 1:23).

The power which produces this new life is the gospel of Jesus Christ. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Rom. 1:16). There is no promise of this new life separate and apart from the gospel (God’s word).

Jesus said, while talking to his disciples, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (Jn. 14:6). Jesus also said; “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath-sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me” (Jn. 6:44-45).

. Paul adds some additional light on the subject when he said, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:13-14).

In our journey from sin to righteousness, it is essential for us to hear the gospel preached, or to be self-taught; that we might understand and believe in Jesus. When faith, which cometh by hearing (Rom. 10:17), is produced in our hearts, then we have the right to move ahead toward being saved. Faith which does not involve one in further obedience is a dead faith (Jas. 2:17-18). Hear what our Lord said; “But as many as received him, to them gave he power (the right, privilege – crl) to become the sons of God, even to them that believe in his name” (Jn. 1:12). So Jesus teaches that the believer has the right to become a son of God. A point of concern should be that the believer is not a son of God the moment that he becomes a believer.

When Peter had preached to the Jews ..on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), the Jews asked, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). There is no evidence that the Jews were at that moment saved, even though they were believers. As believers they were blessed with the opportunity to become sons of God. Peter wasted no time in telling them what to do to be saved. “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38).

The “new life” was realized ,by the Jews when they.. had obeyed what Peter told them to do. This “new life” was realized when they had been baptized. “‘Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: arid the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41).

When the sinner obeys the gospel plan of salvation he becomes a new creature in Christ. When this has been done he has been born of the water and of the Spirit. “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (2 Cor. 5:17).

Those who begin this “new life” and continue unto the end of life will receive the crown of life, eternal life (Rev. 2:10), enjoy all spiritual blessings while they live (Eph. 1:3); and take up their cross and follow after Jesus so long as they live (Matt. 16:24).

Those who begin this “new life” and then turn back in sin should be aware of what Peter said. “But if after they have escaped the pollutions of this world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, then after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandments delivered unto them” (2 Pet. 2:20-21).

Those who know not God and who do not obey the gospel of Jesus Christ need to consider carefully the words of Paul. “And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power” (2 Thess. 1:7-9).

In view of what God’s word teaches on this “new life,” and what is going to happen to those who do not have it: does it not seem the wise thing to do to obey the gospel of Jesus Christ? It will reward us in this life and even more so in the life to come.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 48, p. 770
December 6, 1979

By Lynn Trapp

Recently, I received an announcement from a church here in the Denver area concerning a rummage sale they were having. Their advertisement mentioned some items that the church for which I preach was needing and was looking for, so I decided to go take a look-see. As it turned out, this was the Wheat Ridge Heights “Church of Christ.” Among the things they were selling were some old issues of Leroy Garrett’s Restoration Review. Naturally my interest, at that point, was stirred, so a discussion ensued between myself and the preacher, Dr. C.W. Zenor.

Zenor wanted to know what “wing” of the church of Christ I was associated with. I informed him that I was not in any “wing” of the church. (It is fascinating to me that Garrett and Ketcherside are always objecting to the numerous groups in the “restoration movement” and, yet, they are the only ones I ever hear speak of the church as having “wings” or “branches.”) At this point, I referred to seeing the Restoration Review copies and wanted to know if he agreed with Garrett’s concept. At that, Dr. Zenor made a statement which suggested the title for this article. He said, “We would consider Leroy Garrett to be considerably to the right of us.”

Now, anyone who is aware of the degree of liberalism into which Leroy Garrett has fallen will be just as shocked as I was to find someone in the “Church of Christ” who considers Garrett to be more conservative than themselves. Yet, that is what Zenor said. Of course, I was not one to leave the matter there. I had to know how that could be, so I asked Zenor specifically what he had in mind. What he said in reply to that is even more amazing than his previous statement. In describing the difference between himself and Garrett, Zenor said, “Leroy Garrett believes in the literal inspiration of the Bible, the literal virgin birth, and the literal resurrection.” What significance he may put on the word “literal,” I do not know. I do not understand how there could be a figurative virgin birth, but those are Zenor’s exact words.

Now, is Garrett to be exonerated because the “classical liberals” in “the church” consider him to be a conservative. By no means. When brethren are taught over and over again that doctrinal differences do not affect one’s fellowship with God and should not affect one’s fellowship with false teachers, what argument can be used to refuse a man like C. W. Zenor the right to preach for them. It is liberalism in its earliest forms, the rejection of the need for Bible authority in all that we do, which leads one to be permissive of fellowship and unity and that in turn leads one into the extreme of liberalism taught by men such as Zenor. Brethren, when you are hearing the sweet speeches of a man enticing you to find a way to fellowship the liberals remember that C.W. Zenor and others of like persuasion are down the road somewhere beckoning you to deny the basic principles upon which the gospel is founded.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 47, p. 765
November 29, 1979

By Thomas L. Andrews

Many times society is tolerant and even encourages things that are contrary to God’s will. Such is the case concerning divorce. Jesus had the opportunity to teach the truth on the subject after being questioned by the Pharisees (Mt. 19:3-12). It is sinful to divorce, or put away, a marriage partner. The only exception to this rule is in the case of sexual unfaithfulness of one – fornication. Notice that it is a rightful conclusion to say: Every divorce involves sin.

Consider verse nine more carefully. The person (whoso) that marries the one put away commits adultery. Divorce makes it possible for more than one person to become an adulterer. When we consider that as the result of a divorce, four people could ultimately be guilty of adultery, the sinfulness of divorce is magnified.

How serious is adultery? The Bible teaches that as such an adulterer cannot inherit eternal life (1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-21). The situation that is in existence today is heartbreaking. Knowing that no adulterer shall inherit the kingdom of God, it saddens me to find out that about half of the people I meet are divorced. Many times when we are very sympathetic concerning a matter, we try to work things out to find a solution. Dear reader, do not be guilty of trying to change God’s truth relative to the subject of marriage.

God recognizes the marriages of all people whether they are Christians or not. John the Baptist condemned Herod for taking his brother’s wife (Mk. 6:17-18). Herod was guilty of adultery even though he made no profession of trying to follow God. The matter of the Corinthians demonstrates that God recognizes the union of people while they were yet heathens (1 Cor. 7:12-13). Yes, God recognizes the moral conduct of men before they become a Christian. Repentance requires an adjustment of wrongs which a person has committed (as much as is within his power) before a person becomes justified in the sight of God. The sins a man commits before becoming a Christian will be remembered with regret after he is a child of God. The life of Paul is a clear demonstration of this fact.

Some people would say that a person may marry as many times as they wish and get as many divorces as desired before becoming a Christian. Then, after they have demoralized all the people they can, they may present themselves for baptism, and God will forgive them without them endeavoring to correct crimes they have committed prior to this time. This is one of the most dangerous and untruthful ideas a person can have. I dare not think of the outcome, if this theory were to be advocated to the young of the country. This removes any restraint that ever was and, more importantly, it is contrary to God’s will. Alas, no doubt this type of thinking has been involved in the causes for the decay of the home as we have seen in America.

No man or woman with a living wife or husband not guilty of fornication can marry another without being guilty of adultery. There is no lapse of time that will purge the cohabitation of its sinfulness. To become a child of God one must repent. This involves the confession of sins and correcting of wrongs. The illustration of the horse thief teaches a valuable lesson. The horse thief, in order to repent, must take back the horse that does not belong to him. What about the man that has a wife that does not belong to him? He must give her up! Anything short of this shows a lack of faith in the heart and a lack of genuine repentance. A service to God cannot be done half way.

After Jesus gave the commandment in Mt. 19:9, the disciples decided that it was best not to marry. Christ’s law was so different from the custom that was accepted in their day. If a man was to cleave unto his wife and remain with her all of his days, he had better think about it. Amen!

Here is the point: the trouble with the question of divorce is not a failure to understand the teaching of the Bible, but a lack of faith and courage to do what it requires. The truth of God does not change with the whims of society.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 47, p. 764
November 29, 1979