Truth Magazine

By Don Hastings

Joseph did not submerge himself in pity. He did not become discouraged. If we had been in Joseph’s place, we might have said, “I have tried to serve the Lord faithfully and look where it has gotten me – a slave in prison. I am through living for the Lord and now I’m going to live only for myself.” Thankfully, Joseph did not reason that way.

Joseph was a slave in prison one day and a governor over the mighty kingdom of Egypt the next day. However, the swift and great transition of positions did not change his attitude toward the Lord. How I wish that all of God’s children would maintain a strong, active faith in God, whether they are suffering through adversity or enjoying success! It is easy to understand why “Jehovah was with Joseph.”

The Lord was with Joseph when he was reunited with his father, brothers and sisters. Jacob sent 10 of his sons to Egypt to buy grain for “the famine was over all the face of the earth” (Gen. 41:54-42:5). “And Joseph’s brethren came, and bowed down themselves to him” and thus fulfilled the childhood dreams of Joseph (Gen. 42:6; 37:5-11). Joseph recognized his brothers, but they did not recognize him (Gen. 42:7, 8). He called them “spies” and, to prove that they were not spies, he said they must bring unto him their youngest brother (Gen. 42:8-20). His brothers believed they were being punished because of the way they had mistreated him (Gen. 42:21). Joseph wept when he learned how Reuben had defended him (Gen. 42:22-24). He bound Simeon, gave them grain, and secretly put their money in their sacks.

Jacob refused to let Benjamin go to Egypt for he said, “My son shall not go down with you” (Gen. 42:38). Finally, Jacob was persuaded to let Benjamin go when Judah said that he would be responsible for his brother’s safety (Gen. 43:1-15). In Egypt, Joseph prepared a feast at his house and invited his brothers to attend (Gen. 43:16-28). At the feast, Joseph was overcome with joy because Benjamin was there and he left their presence that he might weep secretly (Gen. 43:29-31). So typical of human nature even today Joseph, washed his face so that others might not detect he had been crying, and went back with the others after getting a grip on himself.

Joseph tested his brothers love for Benjamin by making it appear that Benjamin had stolen his silver cup (Gen. 44:1-13). Judah made a beautiful, passionate plea on Benjamin’s behalf (Gen. 44:14-34). Joseph was so touched by Judah’s unselfish request that he could not withhold his identity any longer (Gen. 45:1-15).

Like Jesus, Joseph was often moved with compassion (Gen. 45:14, 15; 46:29). He did not permit the hardships he had suffered to harden his heart. Is your heart hard and insensitive or is it warm and tender (1 Pet. 3:8; Rom. 12:15)? Only those with a compassionate heart will help their fellowman (Luke 10:33; Matt. 14:14). Pharoah told Joseph to invite all his family to live in Egypt. They came to Egypt and lived in Goshen (Gen. 45:16-50:26).

Joseph fully forgave his brothers. They were afraid that after Jacob’s death, Joseph would treat them cruelly because of the evil which they had done unto him (Gen. 50:15-17). We can read of Joseph’s kind reply to their request that he forgive them in Genesis 50:17-21. Do we completely forgive those who sin against us and ask our forgiveness or do we continue to hold a little resentment in our heart against them (Matt. 6:14, 15; Eph. 4:32)?

Joseph died when 110 years old. (Gen. 50:26) He made the children of Israel promise that they would carry his bones back to Canaan when they left Egypt (Gen. 50:24, 25; Heb. 11:22). This promise was kept (Ex. 13:19; Josh. 24:32).

The Lord was with Joseph guiding him through all his life. It is easy to see God’s providence at work in the life of Joseph. Providence is “the care exercised by the Supreme Being over the universe . . . . The exercise of foresight and care for the future . . .” (Funk and Wagnalls Standard Dictionary, Vol. 11). “Divine providence has come to refer to that foresight and forethought, preservation, care and government of God which enable Him to bring about a desired end “(Florida College Lectures, 1975, “Prayer and Providence,” Homer Hailey, p. 53)

About 200 years before the birth of Joseph, God had told Abraham that his seed would “. . . be sojourners in a land . . .” (Gen. 15:12-14). It was through Joseph that God made provision for His people to go and dwell in Egypt in fulfillment of this prophecy to Abraham (Gen. 45:5-8; 50:19, 20).

It was not just coincidence that the Ishmaelites just happened to be passing by and headed toward Egypt when Joseph was in the pit and that Judah just happened to think of selling him. It was not just by luck that Joseph had interpreted the butler’s dream so that the butler could call Pharoah’s attention to Joseph when Pharoah had dreams, etc.

God is working in your life to make you into the type of person He wants you to be, but you must yield yourself to Him so “His pow’r can make you what you ought to be. . .” (Romans 6:12, 13). Not long ago in a bulletin, under some short sentence sermons I read something similar to this, “If you aren’t happy with the way I am, be patient 6od’s not through with me yet.”

God wants you to become one of His children and be faithful and useful to Him like His servant Joseph. What person would not want to possess the leadership qualities Joseph possessed? Or to have the same confidence Joseph did without becoming over-confident as Joseph controlled that, too? Like Joseph, we should not be afraid to assume responsibility and fulfill it admirably. To be faithful and useful to God, we must mold these characteristics into our lives. Will you let God work with you and through you to accomplish His holy Will?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 40, pp. 648-649
October 11, 1979

By Earl E. Robertson

It is quite obvious that .some do not believe what the New Testament says about this matter. The difficulty arises over the work of the individual and the work of the church. Some allege that the church is at work when one Christian is doing his own daily work; at the same time, some think the individual is at work when the local church is engaged in some activity. Often the mistake is made in failing to recognize that two or more Christians may concurrently work some spiritual service without their action being that of the church. Just because a certain duty is imposed upon all children of God (see 1 Tim. 5:8, 16 as an example), one should not conclude that such is church action. The very opposite in this example is true.

Though the church of the Lord is composed of people blood washed people – it is not made up of just one. Paul wrote, “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12). Again, he wrote, “For the body is not one member, but many” (1 Cor. 12:14). The local church has its work to perform, which work is done in its aggregate capacity; however, the diligent Christian knows all his responsibilities are not discharged in that capacity alone. There are some things peculiar to the church -a collective body – which are not duties of individual Christians. The Lord’s supper is in the church ( 1 Cor. 11:20; Lk. 22:18). Elders are peculiar to the local church (Acts 14:23; 1 Pet. 5:2). The Lord’s supper and elders are recognized by the Scriptures in no place but in the church. Now individual Christians, banded together in forming a local church, eat the Lord’s supper together and they all submit to the elders who have the oversight.

Paul wrote, “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” “If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed” (1 Tim. 5:8, 16). Here inspiration says any believer (Christian) who might have a widow in need must relieve that widow and not the church. That is what the Bible says! Man says, “Anything that is commanded of me as my duty as a Christian is also commanded of my fellow Christian; and therefore, commanded of the church.” Further we are told, “To say that individual Christians are obligated to do certain things that Christians as a collective body cannot do is a misunderstanding of the nature of the church.” Well, Paul misunderstood the nature of the church! Who can believe it? Paul said if believers should have widows let them relieve the widows, and “let not the church be charged. “This is a specific case where “individual Christians are obligated to do certain things that Christians as a collective body cannot do.” Whom will you believe: (1) the human voice, or (2) the divine voice?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 40, p. 648
October 11, 1979

By Bruce James

The Bread of Life is one of the simplest titles of Jesus. He had finished His ministry in Galilee by feeding five thousand miraculously on the far side of the Sea of Galilee. He then returned to Capernaum, and there he met the Jewish leaders (John 6:1-14, 24). The feeding of the five thousand was sure to bring memories of the manna in the wilderness (John 6:31). It was Jesus that said it was not Moses, but God who had given the manna to the people (6:32). He went on to say that the true bread, that which sustains life and overcomes death, must come from God. Then He says: “I am the bread of life . . . . I am the living bread which came down from heaven (6:35, 48, 51). This was a saying that the Jews resented bitterly; they thought they knew who Jesus was, being familiar with His family and His own person; therefore, He should not say that He came down from heaven (6:42). Jesus went farther when He identified this Bread of Life with His own body and blood which men must eat in order to enter into life which in this world is life indeed, and which death cannot touch (6:52-58).

To the Jew (and to you and me) bread is the staff of life. The gift of manna in the wilderness was designed to lead the world to the greatest gift of God – Jesus Christ the Bread of Life – to a world lost and dying in sin. Let us learn the likeness between the “manna” and Jesus “the bread of life.” The Israelites were in the wilderness in need of food. God, in His great compassion for them, sent food from heaven. Christ as the bread of life is the free gift of God sent from heaven to fulfill our spiritual hunger and needs.

We can see a figure of Christ in the manna itself. It was sweet, like wafers of honey. In form it was round, and in color white. In the very nature and work of Jesus, He is precious and sweet to the faithful child of God. In the roundness and color of the manna, we see the completeness of Christ as well as the holiness and the righteousness of His person.

Notice also that the manna in the wilderness was given freely every morning. Today, Jesus is the daily bread of the soul. The manna was to be gathered every day (and early) except the seventh for that was the Sabbath. Manna fell in double quantities on the sixth day to supply their need on the seventh. Jesus is to be first in our lives and, as all the manna was to be eaten, Jesus must be received wholly and completely – as God and man, as prophet, priest and king. Also, do you remember what happened to the manna if it was laid up and not used? It ruined and was consumed by worms. So it is when Christ is preached and not received that death will be brought to that soul.

The true Bread of Life is Jesus. His death and resurrection is the food for our spiritual life. The Jews thought Jesus spoke of His literal flesh, as many do today, but Jesus interpreted the whole lesson by saying: “The words that I have spoken unto you, they are spirit and they are life” (John 6:63). The true Bread of Life gives-.life to the souls of men by our eating this bread inn trust and obedience. By the way, there are many “runt”Christians who are stunted because they have stopped eating. There are thousands of babes in Christ who are dying of spiritual malnutrition. And there are thousands more dying because they have been feeding on cake and poisoned bread. A man who poisons someone is a criminal and that is the crime, spiritually speaking, of false preachers and teachers. Like the Pharisees, they compass sea and land to make one proselyte but then they made him twofold more a son of hell by their false doctrines.

The whole matter of eternal life is in feeding on the Bread of Life. This is done by “abiding in Him” continually. We must not feed on the poisoned bread of the sectarian world. Their message must be tested, examined, and analyzed in light of the Divine Standard of God’s word. Let us also remember that food will do no good unless assimilated or digested. We may come to church for 25 to 30 years with perfect attendance, but unless the gospel gets into our spiritual bloodstream we will die of ritualism, hypocrisy and error. Jesus’ claim is that He is able to give life in this world and in the world to come. Therefore let us say together: “Break Thou the Bread of Life, Dear Lord, to me . . . . Give me to eat and live With Thee above; Teach me to love Thy truth, For Thou art love.”

Truth Magazine XXIII: 40, p. 647
October 11, 1979

By Daniel H. King

A very real and necessary aspect of New Testament Christianity is that Bible doctrine known as repentance. Yet it has been misunderstood and misrepresented by many religious people to the point that the scriptural definition and intention cannot be identified for all the “stuff” that, at first purposed to explain and facilitate it, in the end has obscured and perverted the concept.

Pious fraud. There is no facet of theological thought that better fits this particular description any more suitably than that doctrine of the Roman church known as penance. The idea has a long history and fits well into the veritable maze of false theories and twisted notions that Catholic canon law has built up for herself and her millions of adherents in the long ages of apostasy and departure from God that has been her lot.

The idea started very innocently in the days of the persecution of the early church. Many Christians in the ancient church during those troubled times either disavowed their faith publicly and explicitly or else eluded their duty of profession by dishonest means. At that point the question arose among the faithful as to how they were to be treated. No universal answer appears to have been formulated as to how to treat the so-called “lapsed” until the third century – the fiery days of the Decian and Valerian persecutions when their numbers decidedly increased.

By this time the power of the monarchial bishopric had grown to the point that between 251 and 325 a complete system of penitential rules was elaborated by the bishops. This public Penance was looked upon as a `second Baptism’ and was extended to several sins (at first), especially idolatry, adultery, and murder, and had reference to the scandal given to the church and the necessity of its taking part in the readmission. After the sinner, voluntarily or under threat of excommunication, had asked the Bishop for Penance, he was enrolled in the order of the penitents, excluded from communion, and committed to a severe course of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. At the end of a period of time (determined by the gravity of the transgression) the sinner was reconciled and rejoined the congregation of the faithful. Two things were forbidden him for life: he could not be a soldier and he could not marry. This could only be undergone once in a lifetime. On account of its terrible regimen, most postponed it until the eve of death. For obvious reasons this system was relaxed from the fourth century on.

A new approach was introduced in the eleventh century by Anglo-Saxon monks in their “Penitential Books.” Confession of the details of the sin were private and absolution was granted at the end of the arduous period of Penance. This private penance received its charter at the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, which required every Catholic to confess his sins in Penance at least once a year. Furthermore, it came to be described as a “sacrament” of the church.

Under this requirement, all grave sins were to be confessed to the priest, who was to pronounce forgiveness and impose a fitting satisfaction. According to the contemporary theologians that priestly absolution remitted the guilt and the eternal punishment of sin, but there still remained a temporal punishment which must be worked off through these satisfactions. For any satisfaction not made in this life, the suffering of Purgatory was conjured up by the thinkers. And, for those who could afford to pay for it, the suffering of Purgatory could be avoided by means of the program of Indulgences which were auctioned off by Catholic salesmen. Moreover the “Treasury of Merit” was at the heart of this practice. In every sense this is a system wherein it requires one false doctrine to support another. It all reminds me of a liar who is forced to tell half a dozen more lies in order to cover up for the first one he told!

The word Penance comes from the Latin word peons which means “punishment.” The theory behind the system of Penance is that sins must be atoned for, in part at least, by the punishment of the sinner, on the ground that it was better to endure the punishment in this world than in the next. Sometimes this punishment consisted of fasts, continence, and pilgrimages – but occasionally even floggings and imprisonment were imposed. And, I would suppose that it is improper to speak of such in the past tense. For, although today most penance consists of saying “Hail Mary’s” and “Our Father’s,” still it would seem that these practices do prevail in some places even at the present. For example, by a group known as the Penitentes in northern New Mexico (related to the Third Order of St. Francis and founded in thirteenth-century Italy) as recently as 1971, self-flagellation, carrying of heavy wooden crosses, and even bloody, simulated crucifixions have been practiced in their intense belief that penance is the most direct path to salvation.

In an article by Russell Chandler which appeared in Liberty, he quotes Lorenzo W. Brown as recalling Holy Week penance among these people in the 1920’s and 1930’s:

The most common form was flagellation with a scourge or disciplina plaited from the razor-edged fibers of the yucca plant, and the dragging of heavy wooden crosses known as maderos. These crosses were dragged from the morada to the village church and back, and to a cross set up some distance from the morada to represent Mt. Calvary where Christ was crucified (Vol. 73, No. 3, May-June, 1978, p. 23).

Brown remembers other penances: binding of cactus to the body with tightly drawn horsehair ropes, kneeling for hours on end in silent meditation or prayer on a floor strewn with fine flinty pebbles gathered from ant hills and binding heavy timbers to arms stretched out straight from the shoulders during long hours of penitential procession. Most believe that these same activities are still being carried out in privacy by the Penitentes.

The erroneous views of the Roman church on these matters, if taken to their logical conclusion, are at fault for these perverse and sadistic activities even though most Catholics would today decry this sort of thing. Several false doctrines are at the heart of the matter:

1. The doctrine that the church has the right to make laws about penance or anything else is fundamental to this doctrinal travesty. The scriptures are the authority in every respect – not the church – since they gain their authority from Christ and his apostles (Mt. 4:4, 7, 10; Rom. 10:17; 2 Tim. 3:15-17; 1 Cor. 4:6). Churches, on the other hand, can be and often are influenced by human traditions rather than apostolic ones (Col. 2:8; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:6-7, 14).

2. The doctrine which limits the atonement of Christ to sins which were committed before baptism is foolish and unscriptural. When John discussed the Christian life and made allusion to the reality of sins in the lives Li us all, he made it abundantly clear that Christ’s blood is sufficient to cleanse us of sin when we repent and pray and confess those wrongs (1 Jn. 1:5-10). Those are God’s only preconditions of forgiveness.

3. The doctrine which says that we must be punished for our sins flies in the face of the Bible teaching that Jesus came to “bear the sin of many” (Isa. 53:12) and the scriptural fact that “he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all (Isa. 53:5-6). Catholic doctrine would have men suffer for that which Christ suffered in our place! What an unbelievable heresy!

4. The incredible theory that our suffering for our own sins will actually make some sort of atonement for them is monstrous. If man could have received remission of sins by works of righteousness, then there would have been no need for a Savior. The Bible says we are saved by God’s grace through faith in the atoning power of the blood of Jesus; not any works that we do or’ blood that we spill will atone for a single sin that we have ever sinned. Only the blood of the sinless Son of God can or ever will do that (Eph. 2:5-9; Rom. 3:21-26; 5:1-11). He is the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world (Jn. 1:29). Acts of Penance may make satisfaction to the Catholic church but not to the God of Heaven.

5. The influence of the Latin in this whole matter as it motivated Catholic thought and brought this whole horrid situation about must not be underestimated. The Latin version rendered the New Testament terms for “repentance” as poenitentiam agere or “exercise penitence.” But “penitence” etymologically signified pain, grief, distress, etc. rather than a change of thought and purpose as the original did. Thus, the Catholic theologians, influenced by the Latin mistranslation and the consequent misconception that emerged, have consistently and constantly represented grief over sin rather than abandonment of sin as being the true teaching of the scripture in the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth as a645simple perusal of any Greek lexicon under the terms metamelomai, metanoeo and epistrepho will show. The fundamental idea present in all of these terms has to do with a “change of mind with reference to sin.” Grief may move us to repentance – but grief is not repentance: “Ye were made sorry unto repentance” (2 Cor. 7:9).

It is truly sad that so many have been led astray by this pernicious and Babylonish system. Lord, help us to snatch as many of them as we can out of the fire (Jude 23)!

Truth Magazine XXIII: 40, pp. 645-646
October 11, 1979