Truth Magazine

By Bill Imrisek

In man’s quest for truth he must always recognize the usefulness of Paul’s maxim, “Test all things; hold fast to that which is good” (1 Thess. 5:21). Truth has nothing to fear from investigation. And a man has nothing to lose by putting his faith to a test. If his faith is built upon truth, he can only strengthen his faith as he sees it withstand the challenge. It will endure; he cannot lose it. And if, perchance, his faith proves to be false, he still comes out the winner, for the exposure of error manifests truth, and he has truth to gain.

But truth must be measured by some yardstick. For the Christian, that yardstick is God’s word (John 17:17). To test all things and hold fast to what is good, as Paul commands, we must look to the depository of truth, the Holy Scriptures, which will equip us “for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17). If the Scriptures can lead us to identify “every” good work, whatever is “good” will be authorized in its pages. Likewise, whatever cannot be found authorized in the Scriptures must be discarded as false, and cannot be considered “good” from the viewpoint of the Author of truth, God Himself. By this yardstick we must measure our faith. This is a test that no man should fear to make, for he has nothing to lose and only truth to gain.

The belief that will come under our investigation in this study is the claim of the Roman Catholic Church that it is the one church that Jesus founded. Let us notice this claim as it is presented by one of its own writers.

Jesus Christ founded one Church and defined and described it so plainly that it can be recognized at any time, at any place in the whole world, That Church is the Catholic Church (What Every Catholic Should Know, by Hugh J. O’Connell, p. 7).

That Christ founded one Church – and that the Catholic Church – is simply proved by matching the description which Christ gave of the Church He was founding with the Catholic Church as it has stood for more than nineteen hundred years. Here, again, the least talented and least educated human being can find the proofs and be convinced by them, provided he be of good will and open mind (O’Connell, p. 8).

This is the claim as presented by the Catholic Church, and as such we wish to examine it and to see if it is true. We feel fully qualified to meet this task, believing that none will class us below the “least talented and least educated,” and seeing that we have no desire but to examine this claim with “good will and open mind.”

Allowing the Scriptures to be our guide, we will not deny the assertion that Jesus founded only one church. This is a true statement (Eph. 1:22-23; 4:4-6). And since Jesus is the Savior of that church (Eph. 5:23), we must determine which church is the church that Jesus built. Is it the Roman Catholic Church? Or is it another?

Matthew 16:15-19 marks the first time that Jesus mentions building a church. Here He describes the very foundation upon which this church was to be built. As He converses with Peter, Jesus asks, “But who do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Then Jesus ansered and said, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to thee, but my Father in heaven. And I say to thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

“Upon this rock I will build my church.” It has been the claim of Catholics that this “rock” was Peter. Others claim that the rock referred to is to be understood as being the subject of Peter’s confession, Jesus Christ. Which is it? In a passage such as this which has produced much controversy, it should not be our intention to force the passage to say that which we wish for it to say, but rather to examine it intelligently in the light of other Scriptures which touch on the same point. Truth will not contradict itself.

The apostle Paul assists us by telling us, “For other foundation no one can lay, but that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus” (1 Cor. 3:11). This passage is explicit and clear, and it leaves no doubt as to the nature of the foundation upon which the church is built. If the church is built upon the “rock” and the foundation upon which the church is built is Jesus Christ, then the necessary conclusion is that Jesus is the “rock” of Matthew 16:18. This excludes Peter from being the foundation of the church.

Again, Paul explains to us that the church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20). Since Jesus has already been described as constituting the only foundation, Paul is here speaking of the apostles and prophets as being instrumental in laying that foundation (see 1 Cor. 3:10). It is this foundation upon which the church is built.

Rather than Peter being the “rock” upon which the church is built, he is described as the holder of the keys (Matt. 16:19), as were the other apostles (Matt. 18:18). Keys are a symbol of authority and also provide the means of admittance. To the apostles was committed the responsibility of proclaiming the gospel (laying the foundation) and, thus, directing people of the means by which to gain admittance into the Lord’s church.

The manner, therefore, by which we can determine which church is the church that Jesus founded is by determining and recognizing which church is built upon the foundation laid by the apostles and prophets. This foundation of faith has been laid once for all (Jude 3). The curse of God is upon all those who would tamper with it in any way (Gal. 1:6-9). We must determine which church is built upon the apostolic foundation.

In examining the claims of the Catholic Church we do not wish to misrepresent its beliefs and practices in any way. We desire to be honest. The Catholic Church has felt that it has been a subject of misrepresentation many times in the past. To the degree that this is true, the cause of truth has suffered. Truth cannot be arrived at until the whole truth is presented. We should always strive to be as honest as possible with all men, especially when truth is at stake. To guard against misrepresentation we shall accept the suggestion of the Catholic Church that we represent its doctrines by stating them in its own words.

The dogmas and practices of our Church are not hidden things. They may be found clearly set forth in hundreds of easily accessible books-in the elementary catechism and in the popular explanations of Catholic belief as well as in the works of learned theologians. Why is it, then, we wonder, that the literary genius who contributes to our current magazines does not prepare himself for his task by trying to ascertain precisely which the Catholic Church teaches before he attempts to criticize her teachings or to write a description of her rites and ceremonies? Why is it that the great minds that are called upon, as infallible authorities, to explain matter Catholic for certain encyclopedias do not first acquire a definite and accurate idea on their subject. Why is it again, that hardly a minister of religion can be found in the churches of our separated brethren who can give a clear and truthful statement of the Catholic beliefs and practices which he unsparingly condemns in his Sunday sermon? It would seem reasonable to expect that a man who poses as an expert in any particular line would not fall into gross error everytine that he writes or speaks about his speciality (The Externals of the Catholic Church, John F. Sullivan, p. 248).

The criticism of this writer may be justified. But so that we will not fall into this error we will seek to represent the Catholic position by quoting from only Catholic sources to identify its doctrines. These quotations will be made from Catholic publications which bear the “imprimatur” of the Catholic Church. This Latin word means “let it be printed,” and is its official declaration that a book or pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error from the viewpoint of Catholic doctrine. Thus, we can be sure that what we read represents their true teaching. Likewise, all Biblical quotations will be from a Catholic Bible (the Confraternity Version), lest anyone charge that a Catholic Bible reads differently. All the books from which I quote are books which I have in my own personal possession.

We therefore ask, “Is the Roman Catholic Church apostolic?” We shall pursue this question at some length in the articles to follow.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 5, pp. 86-87
February 1, 1979

By Mike Willis

The conflict between the people of God and the devil and his disciples is as old as the creation of man. Ever since man was created and given a commandment by God to obey, the devil has been trying to persuade man to disobey the Lord. Conflicts have been inevitable. The conflicts necessarily involve the false prophets of the devil and the true disciples of God. Their two doctrines must come into conflict with each other.

The Lord’s church has fought one battle after another through the centuries in an effort to keep the church separated from the forces of Satan. Our own generation has not been without its conflicts between the devil and the Lord, as fought by the soldiers in each’s army. Somewhat over a century ago, the troops were aligned over the introduction of mechanical instruments of music in worship and the church support of missionary societies. Later, the forces assembled for battle again over the doctrine of premillennialism. Then, about twenty-five years ago, the battle was fought once again. On this occasion, the issues were such things as church support of benevolent societies, reward motivation as a means to increase the attendance, and other such false doctrines. The lines were drawn and the battles were fought.

This was not the end of all wars between God’s people and the devil’s people. Indeed, we are already in the throes of another great conflict. This time, the issue concerns the subject of fellowship and salvation. Some are advocating fellowship with any baptized believer in “any segment of the restoration movement” (others open the. door for fellowship with Baptists). They have justified this through the acceptance of the Calvinistic doctrine of the imputation of the perfect obedience of Christ to the believer’s account. The lines have been drawn and the battle is being fought. The battle is raging.

As we witness the battle in all of its fury, we are reminded of the Christian’s responsibility when Satan’s forces and God’s people come into conflict. Every Christian has a responsibility to take out his sword of the Spirit and fight! Yet, not all have done so. Some of the brethren have not given much support to the valiant men who have sought to stop the spread of this heresy among us. Because of that, I would like to consider some of the statements regarding Edom’s conduct toward Israel when Israel was under assault as a means of seeing our responsibilities in this battle.

A Study of Obadiah

The book of Obadiah was probably written about 845 B.C. during the reign of Jehoram, king of Judah. During the reign of Jehoram, Edom had revolted against Judah (2 Chron. 21:8-10). Later, the Philistines and Arabs allied themselves to fight against Judah “and carried away all the substance that was found in the king’s house, and his sons also, and his wives” (2 Chron. 21:16-17). During this battle, Edom allied themselves with Judah’s enemies.

The atrocious act which they committed can be better understood when one remembers that the Edomites were descendants of Esau, the brother of Jacob. The animosity and hostility which characterized the early relationship between these twin sons of Isaac and Rebekah reflected and hatred between the two nations which descended from their loins. Edom refused to allow Israel passage through their borders as they journeyed toward Canaan (Num. 20:14-21; 21:4). Saul fought the Edomites and subdued them (1 Sam. 14:47); David stationed garrisons there (2 Sam. 8:14; I Kgs. 11:15-16). Despite the fact that the Edomites were brothers to the Israelites, when the Philistines and Arabs attacked Judah, they took the side of Judah’s enemies (v. 11), rejoiced in their suffering (v. 12), looted their land (v. 13), and slew the Jews who escaped their enemies (v. 14).

Because of the atrocities committed against the Jews, God raised up the prophet Obadiah to rebuke them for their failure to come to the assistance of their brethren and for taking their stand with the other side, the enemies of Israel. Here is God’s rebuke through Obadiah:

For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shah he cut off forever. In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them (vs. l0-11).

The Edomites sinned grievously against their brethren the Israelites by taking their stand, lending their support and encouragement to the enemies of Israel.

The Application

In the most recent controversies over the grace-unity movement’s doctrine of fellowship andthe Calvinism espoused by them, some of our brethren have committed exactly the same sin against those engaged in fighting for truth as the Edomites committed against Israel. Yet, few seem to be concerned about these men. To my knowledge, nothing has been written about those who “stood on the other side” and acted “as one of them” through the conflict.

During those years, many were heard to say, “I agree with what they (meaning such men as James Adams, Cecil Willis and Ron Halbrook) are saying but do not like their methods.” Frankly, I did not agree with all their methods either. It should be added, however, that neither would they agree with all of my methods. None of us are totally agreed about when is the best time or what is the best manner of saying a given thing. These brethren have not called upon brethren all over the country to defend their tactics in assaulting the forces of Satan. They have, however, called upon all other brethren to fight the enemy of all righteousness. If some of our readers know of a better way to assault the forces of Satan and expose the men propagating the doctrines of the devil, let him show us that better way.

I am not claiming perfection in my methods, nor have I heard anyone else claim perfection in his methods. I have even read where one or two had to print a public retraction because of something which they said in print. Yet, they were involved in trying to destroy the false doctrines being preached by the false men among us. Some who have been so loud in their criticisms of another’s methods need to look at themselves rather closely to see if they might have committed the same sin as Edom committed! In the day of the fight, did you stand on the other side? Were you as one of the enemies?

It is one thing to disagree with another person’s method while standing united with them in doing what you can to assault the enemy of all righteousness. It is quite another thing to leave the impression, because of your constant complaining about the methods of those who are fighting the battle, that you oppose the very battle being fought. Some complained so loudly about the methods being used to fight this great battle that those who were pushing these false doctrines were left with the distinct impression that these men were on their side. Some were indeed as “one of them.”

Even today, others are trying to leave the impression in principle that there is some kind of middle-of-road position available for us in which we do not have to be so radical as to name the men who are teaching the false doctrine among us, although we can stand opposed to the damnable heresies. False doctrines are still being spread by false teachers. Frankly, I cannot understand why some editors think that they are standing for the truth when they criticize those who are rooting out and exposing the heretics among us but are doing nothing themselves to salvage churches and men being led astray by these false men. Indeed, so far as I can tell, they stand as “one of them.”

In an attempt to be more specific about what it takes to be guilty of the sin of Edom against Israel, let me enumerate some of the things which I have seen in the recent conflict which leads me to believe that some of my brethren are guilty of the sin which Edom committed.

1. The defense of false teachers. During this recent conflict, some brethren who want to be considered as sound defended false teachers totally. Some journeyed many, many miles to rise to the defense of false teachers. Others in print, did virtually the same thing.

2. Assaulting the ones who were defending the truth. Not only did brethren defend the false teachers, others assaulted those who were trying to expose the heresies taught by these false men. The publication of Falth Magazine is the most blatant example of this, but it was by no means the only example of this. The pages of Gospel Guardian under the editorship of William Wallace were filled with the assaults against men such as James Adams, Cecil Willis and Ron Halbrook for their exposure of the heresies taught by Edward Fudge, Arnold Hardin, Leroy Garrett, Carl Ketcherside and others. Others who have traveled across this country have heard numerous men bad-mouthing these same people. Their complaining was so great that some were left with the impression that they did not stand opposed to the false doctrines that were talked about.

3. A refusal to fight. Some men lended support to the other side by refusing to stand for what they knew was right. If a man is doing all that he can to oppose the false doctrine, that does not mean that he has to come out in print in a paper published among brethren with a “me-too article,” but it does seem like to me that a man needs to be preaching on the subject, talking with other people about it, warning others about these doctrines and whatever else that he can do to prevent the spread of this heresy. The man who refuses to take his sword from the scabbard when the war is in force, has lent his support to the other side.

Perhaps there are other ways of lending one’s support to the other side, which I have not enumerated. One thing is clear in my mind, however, that is that the person who is guilty of lending his support to the other side has transgressed the holy commandment of God and stands condemned by the Word of God found therein.

Conclusion

I am not calling upon all men in the brotherhood to rally to the defense of Truth Magazine. We are, however, calling upon brethren to defend the truth, to propogate the truth and to oppose the heretics who are assaulting the very gospel of Christ. The errors that have been spread by the grace-unity movement are errors that are not confined to any one given locality. Consequently, it is going to be necessary for brethren to spend time studying these doctrines and teaching on the subject with reference to this conflict just as certainly as it was with reference to institutionalism, church-sponsored recreation and a variety of other damnable heresies which have affected the church. It is my prayer that conscientious brethren everywhere will look at themselves to see if they lent their support to the cause of truth rather than, as Edom did, “acting as one of them.”

Truth Magazine XXIII: 5, pp. 83-85
February 1, 1979

By William V. Beasley

As far as your eternal soul is concerned, are you ready to die and stand before God in judgment? If you say “No” or “I don’t know,” then you do not “know that ye have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). Your soul’s salvation may indeed depend upon your knowing concerning “eternal life.” This is, according to 1 John 5:13, something we can know.

Begotten of God (1 John 5:1)

The statement, “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God” (5:1) is not speaking of a speculative, wavering belief, but of a firm persuasion that causes one to obey Jesus Christ completely. The gospel of John, written by this same John, shows that to truly believe is to obey: “He that believes on the Son has life eternal; and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life . . .” (John 3:36, Berry’s Greek-English Interlinear, pp. 248-249). A genuine belief that “Jesus is the Christ” will cause one to turn from sins in repentance (Luke 24:47), confess the name of Jesus (Matt. 10:32; Rom. 10:10), be buried with Him in baptism (Rom. 6:4) and to present his body “a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God” (Rom. 12: l; see also Rev. 2:10).

Love Of God And Brethren (1 John 5:1-3)

If we love God (“him that begat” – 5:Ib), we will also love His children (“him . . . that is begotten” – 5:1b), our brothers and sisters in Christ. Do you love the children of God? John tells us how to know: “Hereby we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and do his commandments” (5:2), Many of God’s commandments to us involve His other children (Matt. 18:15; Gal. 6:1, 2; Eph. 4:25). We are commanded to love one another (John 13:34; I John 3:23) and to live as an example to others (Matt. 5:13-16; Rom. 14:21). Love for God is always shown by obedience (5:3). It is not possible to love God while living in disobedience. We can test our love for God: “How much do I love God?” and “How much do I obey God?” is really one question. This, brethren, is not a subjective test.

Faith Is The Victory (1 John 3-5)

If obedience to God is a heavy burden, a cause of grief, our faith is weak. Through faith we can overcome the world, temptation, trials and afflictions. Through faith we can bear the otherwise unbearable (see Rom. 8:18).

Witnesses To Our Faith (1 John 5:6-9)

Jesus Christ came “by water and blood” (5:6). .Jesus vas first acknowledged to be the Son of God at His Baptism (Matt. 3:17), and while on the cross both blood and water flowed from His side (John 19:34). In each of those, the Holy Spirit bore witness to His Sonship. At His baptism the Spirit descended as a dove (Matt. 3:,16) and by His resurrection Jesus was shown to be the Son of God (Rom. 1:4; 1 Pet. 3:8).

There are “three that bear record in heaven; the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost” (5:7, KJV). The Father bore witness verbally twice (Matt, 3:17; 17:5) and also at the crucifixion (three hours of darkness, earthquake, rending of rocks, splitting of the veil of the temple). The Word, Jesus, bore witness to His Sonship (1 Tim. 6:13; Matt. 27:11). The Holy Spirit bore witness, as we have already noted, in the baptism and resurrection.

There are also “three that bear witness in earth: the spirit, and the water, and the blood” (5:8, KJV). The Spirit continually witnesses through the word written at His direction by the apostles (John 16:13; 20:30f). The waters of baptism, not of Jesus but of penitent believers (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38) are a witness that Jesus is God’s Son. The blood, as commemorated by the fruit of the vine in the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:23-26) is the third witness. The witness of God is greater than man’s witness (I John 5:9) and God’s witness in that Jesus is His Son.

“Witness In Him” (1 John 5:10-12)

When one truly obeys the gospel of Christ, changes are brought about in His life. These changes serve as a witness. Paul’s change in his manner of life was witness to the validity of his conversion. The change in our lives is such a witness. The lack of change or refusal to obey calls God a liar. Life is “in his Son” (5:11; see Gal. 3:27). If we do not have Jesus, we do not have life, but abide in death.

Conclusion

Do you know concerning eternal life? Do you believe that “Jesus is the Christ?” Do you love the brethren (i.e., love God and keep His commandments)? Is faith your victory over the world? Do you have the witness of a reformed life? Are you “in His Son” where there is life? If you do not know, you can, yea must, do something about it.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 5, p. 82
February 1, 1979

By Earl E. Robertson

Without fear of successful contradiction we affirm that we live in a permissive society. Frequently we observe permissive actions stemming from what religious guides identify as sufferance conditions. This behavior is situational and these people know it. They allow a situation to determine whether God’s word is standard or not; that is, whether the word of God will apply to one and all alike under all circumstances and conditions. To illustrate the point: men who are convinced that the New Testament word “baptism” means a “burial” (Rom. 6:3, 4; Col. 2:12), will grant, under certain situations, a substitute-pouring or sprinkling. Some allege to believe the sufficiency and independency of churches of Christ in their government, work, and worship. But through efforts of the churches in subsidizing human organizations, and the hierarchical arrangements called sponsoring churches, they belie this allegation.

Some refuse to accept the truth because they believe they already have it. One’s honesty is not attacked in this statement. We only say he is honestly mistaken in his religious thinking and convictions. The Eunuch in Acts 8 well illustrates this point. This man was deeply religious. He had gone to Jerusalem “for to worship” and was returning home. This distance was about 1500 miles. He was a Bible reader! He was honest. But he was wrong! When Philip the evangelist taught him the truth, he not only believed it but obeyed it before he got home. He told no experience of grace and no church voted as to whether he might obey Christ in baptism for the remission of his sins. Up to the time of Philip instructing him correctly, this man thought he had the truth.

Others are prejudiced. They have already made up their minds and quickly tell you they are satisfied and do not care to be bothered. Like Nathanael, when first approached, these quickly declare their minds are made up and closed. Nathanael was told by Philip, “We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” But this man replies, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” (John 1:45-51). Prejudice is one of the world’s greatest robbers! Let it not rob you of what Jesus came to give: truth and life!

Truth Magazine XXIII: 4, p. 76
January 25, 1979