Truth Magazine

By Johnie Edwards

`Mormons open lay priesthood to blacks” was the title of an article which appeared in The Indianapolis Star on Saturday, June 10, 1978. According to the article, Mormon Church President Spencer W. Kimball, received a new revelation, from God. Mr. Spencer is quoted as saying, “He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood. Accordingly, all worthy male members of the church may be ordained to priesthood without regard for race or color.”

Which Is Correct?

The Mormon Church has taught in the past that Blacks could not be a part of the Priesthood. Notice some of the statements Mormon leaders have made concerning this subject.

“Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin and have been denied the privilege of priesthood and the fulness of the blessings of the Gospel” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, p. 101).

“This doctrine did not originate with President Brigham Young but was taught by the Prophet Joseph Smith …. we all know it is due to his teachings that the Negro today is barred from the Priesthood” (Ibid.).

“As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin: he became the father of the Negroes, and those spirits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 102).

“Any man having one drop of the seed of Cain in him cannot receive the priesthood” (Brigham Young in Wilford Woodruff by Mathias F. Cowley, p. 351).

“The church has no intention of changing its doctrine on the Negro . . . It’s a Law of God” (N. Eldon Tanner, 2nd Counselor to Joseph Fielding Smith, in Seattle Magazine, December 1967, p. 60).

“Negroes in this life are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty” (Bruce R. McConkie in Mormon Doctrine, 1958, p. 477).

I am asking, which of these teachings is correct? They both cannot be. Rather interesting isn’t it?

No New Revelation

When the last book of the New Testament was written the pen of inspiration was forever laid down. Jude said, “Beloved, when I have all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith, which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). The word `once’ means once for all time. All of God’s truth has been made known. “How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery: Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit” (Eph. 3:3,5).

No Distinction As To Color

‘The New Testament makes no distinction as to color in regards to man’s relationship to God. The newspaper article quoted Mr. Kimball as saying, “he had received a direct revelation from God to extend to every worthy member of the church all of the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords.” I read where God has already extended all of the privileges and blessings of the gospel to all men. “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:26-29).

All Christians Are Priests

Long before Mr. Kimball learned that Blacks could be priests, God had already made known that every Christian is a priest unto God. “And bath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father: to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever” (Rev. 1:6). There is no such thing taught in the Bible, as the Mormons teach, concerning priesthood. for man today.

Truth Magazine XXII: 32, p. 524
August 17, 1978

By Carol R. Lumpkin

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). There was order, meaning, and beauty. Everything was good for God made it so. Some 4029 years after the creation, Jesus authorized baptism as an act which would bring salvation to man. He gave it order, meaning, and beauty. Everything about it was and is good.

There is no religious act in the New Testament which is described with so rich and varied symbols. Baptism is a birth into the new life. Baptism is God’s way of washing away sins. Baptism is the exodus out of bondage to sin into Christ. Baptism is the act through which one enters the church and begins his journey toward heaven.

The apostle Paul described baptism as the re-enaction of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. “We were bured therefore with him through baptism into death that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). Just as Jesus died, man must die to sin. Just as Jesus was buried, man must be buried in water. Just as Jesus was raised, man must come forth from the grave of the water. The new life is experienced not before but after baptism.

Jesus speaks of baptism as a new birth. “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except one be born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:5). The new birth consists of both water and Spirit. The Holy Spirit begets us through the revealed word. “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God” (1 Pet. 1:23). The physical birth brings one into the family of man while the spiritual birth brings one into the family of God. “In one spirit are we all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13).

The apostle Peter compared our baptism to Noah’s salvation from the flood. “Which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away. of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:21). Even as Noah and his family were saved by water, so we are saved after receiving water baptism. The new life in Christ cannot be realized until the old man of sin has been removed. Peter certainly makes this rather plain, “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). There is no remission of sins without water baptism. Salvation always follows scriptural baptism. Jesus makes this shine forth when He gave the Great Commission; He, said, “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. . . ” (Mk. 16:16).

It is certain from each case of conversion recorded in Acts, that baptism was the final act commanded to be saved. The eunuch requested baptism after Philip had preached Jesus to him (Acts 8:35-39). Peter commanded Cornelius to be baptized in the name of the Lord (Acts 10:48). The only way Paul could remove his sins was through baptism (Acts 22:16).

That baptism is commanded to have salvation from past sins in no sense means that it must. not be preceded by faith, repentance, and confession of Christ. Each of these commands are imposed on the sinner before he becomes a saved person. Why not give baptism the place that God gives it? Baptism is indeed a beautiful act since it betrays the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The saved will and must obey Jesus in baptism.

Truth Magazine XXII: 32, pp. 520-521
August 17, 1978

By Howard L. Whittlesey

Time, experience and many helpful discussions have given me greater depth and insight to what the Bible teaches about congregational singing and about song leading. No, I am not going to attempt to enlighten you about singing versus the instrument, nor shall I strive to convince one about the truth concerning whether or not all or part should sing. It is my desire to share with you some problems which so long have beset me from the simple task of glorifying and praising the Godhood through my singing.

Since I teach vocal music for a living, it is easy for me to insist on musical perfection from both a technical and an aesthetic point of view. On the one hand, I used to feel that wrong notes -were an outward indication of apathetic worship. It would be easy to cite a host of examples wherein congregations across the land make the same mistake on songs which are mutually familiar to many of us. I used to feel that a Christian could ill afford to sing a rhythmic phrase incorrectly and be satisfied with his musical worship. Yet many of us know that the dotted eighth-sixteenth combination is one of the most abused of all in congregational singing (regardless of how good the song sounds). I used to feel that the song leader had to start the song on the right pitch and use his arm on correct beat patterns in order for the song service to glorify God. I used to wonder how the “non-singer” (better known as `tone-deaf singer) could ever sing praises to God and God not want to hold His fingers in His ears. But that was `yesterday,’ in a manner of speaking, and yesterday is gone.

Today, I hear my brethren sing wrong notes, but still they are deeply engrossed in the teaching of that song. I hear them still abuse the dotted eighth-sixteenth, but they are “teaching and admonishing one another” anyway. The song leaders everywhere still pitch a few songs too low for the basses or too high for the sopranos, but that has never yet been grounds for dismissal from worship (although you might catch the faint uttering of prayers from died-in-the-wool musicians of the church). Many song leaders from border to border fail to use the prescribed beat patterns, or at best, they use them in a very undistinguishable way, but the congregation does not watch that anyway. The non-singer has sung on like a joyful pilgrim (some would say that “Here We Are But Straying Pilgrims” was written with non-singers in mind) and probably grew spiritually more than the lady in front who later complained of the congregational singing. And this is still today.

Do you suppose the Psalmist played any wrong notes on his harp when he rendered praise to God therewith? Do you think that Paul’s approved apostolic example of `singing with the understanding’ meant that wrong notes were forbidden by God? Where is the scripture that would suggest that the song leader must `go forward’ if he starts a song on the wrong pitch or fails to use universal beat patterns? By the way, the beat patterns were not prescribed by God. Do you believe the non-singer is denied a single measure of grace despite his annihilation of the final beautiful chord of the invitation song?

But we hear one saying, “Good singing builds a fire in the congregation. So it is important from that standpoint that right notes, correct rhythms, the correct starting pitches and effective song leading occur.” Well might it be said that success should be sought in these areas. However, let us not put these factors above their level of importance. Can God be glorified without one or all of these factors? If all that was wrong with an entire song service was a few wrong notes, was God denied His glory thereby? What, in that case, will a congregation do if it has no one who knows enough about music to read or lead music correctly and effectively? Does God tune out that congregational singing? What do we suppose Paul, or other of the apostles, knew about music? Did they have hymn books? The correct answers to these questions allow us to understand that a fire may vary in intensity and brightness and still be a fire; and when it is cold, even a small fire attracts a lot of attention.

The question then is: “Does the glory of God build us a fire? or Does our fire glorify God?” If the glory of God builds a fire, then I am afraid we are all doomed. The reason is simple: God’s glory is His perfection. All of our right notes, correct rhythms, correct starting pitches and correct beat patterns emanate that perfection and thereby He is glorified. Let’s face it, though-all our wrong notes, incorrect rhythms, incorrect starting pitches and incorrect beat patterns (or the absence of one at all) will serve to defile His glory. I fail to visualize a God who is so merciless and vain. I rather visualize a God who searches the heart (Rom. 8:27) and finds that my spirit is willing but my mind and flesh are weak. He knows that not all my notes, rhythms, pitches and patterns are right, but my heart, my will and desire to glorify Him are. The ideal of course is to have a good song service from both the technical (or mechanical) and the aesthetic standpoints. However, we should never choose to sacrifice His glory for a few mechanics. Let us each build our own fire and seek to magnify and to praise God thereby. God is pleased with our perfection, but our perfection is far too inconsistent to be depended upon for building spiritual or emotional fires. Yea. rather let us perfect our hearts and our spirits.

Time, experience and many discussions will help all of us to confront the realization that common sense in application is the earnest necessity in all of our service to the Master. While we insist that our individual service should grow and develop, we make concessions for our mistakes and never let them block our view of what God really requires of us.

All the scriptures of the New Testament which cover the subject of church music say absolutely nothing about the mechanics (right notes, rhythm, pitches, patterns) of music. The biggest thrust of those scriptures is to use the God-given instrument-the voice-and praise His name with it, unaccompanied by mechanical devices of music. Why ask more of ourselves than God asks of us?

Now on the other hand, in the interest of unity and cooperation, let me offer some suggestions to those of you who are conscious of your musical mechanics. First, let us all regard each music symbol as a tool for common communication. Paul told his Corinthian brethren (1 Cor 1:10) to “speak the same thing.” In like manner, we should strive to sing the same thing. This is not an admonition, for I personally believe that the vast majority of singing in the church is done by sincere, conscientious singers. Granted, there are huge numbers of people who learn strictly by rote. The method of learning to sing is not discussed in God’s Word. Second, if you are concerned enough about the mechanics of music to want to become more knowledgeable, you might begin by learning the “Do” scale and the shaped note system. If this is learned effectively, you will go a long ways toward growing in technical musicianship. Third, do not expect everyone else to show or share an interest like yours in perfecting your singing.

I am thankful to the congregations who in the past have entrusted me with the task of assisting them in improving their singing. I am confident that their collective spirits have had no unhealthy desires involved. I urge all individual Christians to make sure that the ultimate goal of all singing is to glorify God. Let not musical mechanics be overly sought nor overemphasized. May God’s glory pervade every note you sing — right or wrong.

Truth Magazine XXII: 33, pp. 533-534
August 24, 1978

By Earl Robertson

The New Testament says, “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord” 1 Cor. 15:58). Paul had given rational grounds for faith and hope in Christ, the risen Lord and Savior, and now calls upon these saints to be firm and unshakeable. They now had an understanding as to why they should be steadfast in all that the gospel demanded. This word “steadfast” is here used in a metaphorical sense of those who are fixed in purpose. Again, the same apostle wrote, “If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel . . . .” (Col. 1:23). The word “settled” translates the same word rendered steadfast” in 1 Cor. 15:58.

The expressed admonition by Paul, writing as the Spirit of God moved him, makes man know his need for firmness. It would seem unthinkable that a condemned sinner coming to know the saving power of God, turning in faith and repentance and being baptized into Christ for the remission of- sins, would then have great difficulty to be firm for the Lord. Yet, this is the very problem experienced -by so many would-be Christians today. Some will not leave alcohol alone; some continue to lie; others continue to steal; and continue in adultery. While the word of God forbids one to do these-things, and condemns the sinner in doing them, many so-called Christians are found engaged in them. The word of God also forbids a Christian to “forsake the assembling” of himself with the saints (Heb. 10:25), but many have no steadfastness in this matter. They can miss assembly after assembly and think there is impunity in such behavior. “Steadfast”? They do not know its meaning.

The same passage says; “Always abounding in the work of the Lord.” This plural participle “abounding” is present active, meaning the Christian must keep on abounding. This means steadfastness in one’s action. Faithfulness to God is not something that we turn on and off at will and everything turns out okay. Do you read and study your Bible? .Are you trying to do the work of the Lord faithfully? Or, are you doing it in an “on again, off again” fashion? Be firm in doing the work authorized in the word of God.

Truth Magazine XXII: 32, p. 520
August 17, 1978