Truth Magazine

By Johnie Edwards

This article does not deal with romance! It does deal with a list of things which people are said to love. Some of the things listed are things which God would have us love and there are some listed which God does not approve of man loving.

Lovers of God

God expects a first place in the lives of His people. Jesus said, ‘Thou shaft love the Lord thy God with all thy, heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind” (Matt. 22:37). We cannot please God if we fail to love Him. Yet there are those who are “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God . . .” (2 Tim. 3:4). When men find no pleasure in loving God and do not want to retain God in their knowledge, God will give them over to a reprobate mind, to “do those things which are not convenient” (Rom. 1:28). We should be ready to confess as did Peter, “Yea Lord, thou knowest that I love thee . . ” (Jn. 21:15).

Lovers of Good

God expects us to be lovers of good men and good things. One of the qualifications for elders is that they be lovers of “good men” (Tit. 1:8). We need to think on “whatsoever things are of good report . . .” (Phil. 4:8). If we are to be lovers of good, we must by reason of use, have our senses exercised “to discern both good and evil” (Heb. 5:14). Too many have pleasure in that which is bad and dislike that which is good.

Lovers of Hospitality And of Strangers

So many fail to practice hospitality as God expects of His people. An elder must be “a lover of hospitality . . .” (Titus 1:8). Peter said, “Use hospitality one to another without grudging” (1 Pet. 4:9). Paul said, “distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality” (Rom. 12:13). I am afraid that too many do not want to clean up, miss an afternoon nap and are just too lazy to practice hospitality! When we begin to put hospitality into practice we will be a willing host, ready to receive guests, even to lodge, without partiality, the rich as well as the poor.

Lovers of the Brethren

There is not enough love among the brethren. Paul said, “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one another” (Rom. 12:10). We are told, “Let brotherly love continue” (Heb. 13:1). We must to be saved, Peter said, “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently” (1 Pet. 1:22).

Lovers of the Truth

There is a great demand for more people to love the truth. The truth is the Word of God (Jno. 17:17). The Psalmist said, “Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; yea above fine gold” (Psa. 119:127). Loving the truth can be a matter of life and death. Paul told the Thessalonians, “And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10). If I do not love the truth, I will be lost. One reason people do not obey the truth is that they do not love the truth.

Lovers of Worldly Wisdom

We must beware of the `god of education.’ Much emphasis is being put on getting more schooling, getting a better job and having more things. Education is fine, and I am not against education, but education must be one’s servant, not his master! Paul warned the Colossians, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ” (Col. 2:8). Paul said, “That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (1 Cor. 2:5). Gospel preaching must not be with “enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor. 2:4). Man, by worldly wisdom cannot know God. nor His will. We need to remember that “the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Cor. 1:25).

Lovers of Pleasure

Paul told Timothy that people would be “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God” (2 Tim. 3:4). We seem to be living in a “pleasure crazy” world. Pleasure has brought death to many. Paul said, “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth” (1 Tim. 5:6). Loving pleasure keeps many from obeying the Word of God. Jesus pointed out in the parable of the sower that the “cares and riches and pleasures of this life choke out the word” (Luke 8).

Truth Magazine XXII: 27, pp. 445-446
July 13, 1978

By Ron Halbrook

For The Truth’s Sake, we must “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18). The sexual capacity is a power for good. Like. all such powers, it can be abused and misused. “Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers (fornicators) and adulterers God will judge” (Heb. 13:4). Women must guard against wicked men, men must guard against wicked women, and all must guard against falling victim to temptation unintentionally. “Flee” suggests something dangerous and dreadful, just as the picture of a skull and crossbones on a bottle of poison.

We should flee fornication for many reasons:

(1) It violates the purpose for which God made the body. God made food for the body and the body to receive food. He supplied an answer to all our normal needs. “Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body . . . .he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body” (1 Cor. 6:1320). 1 Cor. 7:2-6 shows that our sexual needs are to be fulfilled in marriage, with God’s blessing. Fornication is rebellion against the purpose for which God made us. This is doubly true for Christians, who have been purchased with the blood of Christ to serve God in all things (1 Cor. 6:20).

(2) It destroys homes. God does not allow divorce and remarriage, except for an innocent party whose mate commits fornication. Jesus said, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. . . Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matt. 19:1-9). Neither can remarry when one puts the other away for some cause other than fornication. In a practical way, fornication destroys homes because it destroys mutual confidence, trust, and love. In addition, within the bounds of God’s law, permission is given to break up the home where such infidelity occurs.

(3) It stirs the wrath of God. When many Israelites committed fornication “with the daughters of Moab,” God commanded that they be put to death. He said, “Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the Lord against the sun, that the fierce anger of the Lord may be turned away from Israel” (Num. 25:15). If the punishment seems horrible, it gives us some idea of how horrible this sin is in God’s sight! Today, God is still angered by such sin-He recorded Israel’s history as a constant reminder (1 Cor. 10:8-11).

(4) It will cause us to lose our soul eternally. “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness . . . 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. 5:1921). If we would be delivered “from the power of darkness” and translated “into the kingdom of his dear Son,” we must be “buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead” (Col. 1:13; 2:12). Christians who become guilty will be lost unless they repent and seek God’s forgiveness.

Truth Magazine XXII: 28, p. 450
July 20, 1978

By Larry Ray Hafley

When Dick Blackford met Paul Dabdoub in debate in Dyersburg, Tennessee, late last year, one of those in attendance was Mr. W. C. Nevil. Mr. Nevil is an aged Missionary Baptist preacher. He was debating before Dick Blackford was born. He met Joe Warlick, a gospel preacher whose name and reputation are virtually unknown to our generation. Also, Mr. Nevil has engaged A. C. Grider and James P. Needham. Needham said of Nevil, “Nevil is the best debater I ever met. He knows all the old Bogard quibbles and presents them in a convincing way.” At any rate, Mr. Nevil’s blood was stirred by the debate between Dabdoub and Blackford. Like an old fire horse who hears the fire bell and feels his pulse quicken and his nostrils flair, Mr. Nevil could not resist the arena of debate. So, he challenged Dick for a debate. The debate was held near Cadiz, Kentucky, May 22-25, 1978.

The debate was rather poorly attended. This was due in part to the fact that there is not a faithful church near the site of the debate. However, brethren drove great distances to hear the discussion. Gene Harris, an elder where Dick preaches, and Wendell West, treasurer of the church, drove many miles and performed well in helping the discussion to be a success. Sam Bynum also did excellent work handling the charts for Dick. All I had to do was pour water for Dick to drink. Also, I think I led prayer one night-4hey could not have gotten along without me!

Dick had prepared many beautiful charts to present his affirmative material and to answer Mr. Nevil’s Baptist doctrine. He was well prepared. Dick has a nice, gentle way about him that makes it hard to get angry at him. Mr. Nevil has a harsh manner that was tempered by Dick’s calm, sincere presentation.

Who Are The Bad Guys?

Christians are always condemned for “name-calling.” Somehow, it is “us” but never “them” that gets the black eye for “calling names.” Well, if Mr. Nevil said “Campbellite” once, he said it a hundred times. He had a few charts that pictured the “Campbellite Church” and constantly referred to “Campbellite preachers.” Below are some of his quotes from the tapes:

“I know you despise the grace of God. You hate it worse than anything in the world.” “You Campbellite preachers are not gospel preachers. You are gospel blasphemers.” “Campbellite preachers can’t stand faith in Christ as a means of salvation.” “You Campbellite preachers preach Campbellite lessons.” “You’re a member of the outfit started by Alexander Campbell.” Those are just some samples. Campbellites trust in the water for salvation; Campbellites have their faith in the water and not in the blood of Jesus Christ these charges were constantly made by Mr. Nevil. Yet, “Campbellites” are the bad guys! We are the ones who “call names!” Dick did not respond to this kind of tactic by doing the same thing, and it was effective. He simply explained the truth and showed why we ought to be Christians.

Usual Proof

Mr. Nevil resorted to the usual line of proof for his position. He cited Lk. 7:50, the palsied man, the thief on the cross, etc. It was the usual, typical approach that has been answered through the years. Dick responded to Nevil’s arguments point by point. Mr. Nevil, on the other hand, ignored most of Dick’s affirmative material. He did not attempt to deal with the arguments which were presented in each speech.

Bloopers And Blunders

Mr. Nevil made too many bloopers and blunders to mention. It would take a whole series of articles to even notice them all. A few, though, are worthy of note. He took the position that the Lord’s Supper is referred to in Matthew 26:28 as that which is shed “for the remission of sins.” He said the Lord’s Supper, like baptism, merely pictures our salvation and that the Lord’s Supper declares the remission of sins in Matthew 26:28. Look it up and see what you think. Mr. Nevil said that repentance and faith are “the same act;” “I want to emphasize now this thought-one and identically the same-repentance and faith.” Several things were said in reply, but the most telling thing was the Lord’s statement in Matthew 21:32, “Ye . . .repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.” Mr. Nevil never noticed this passage. I think the Baptists were embarrassed by his position on this point. Mr. Nevil said that Simon the Sorcerer sought to “buy salvation.” See Acts 8:18, 19. He never corrected himself. He said that Naaman was healed by water in 2 Kings 5. There were others, but this is enough to show the plight of false teachers. Some of you who have never attended a debate probably cannot believe the things a sectarian preacher will say. It would be a good thing for you to attend and see that they do say the ridiculous things that preachers say they do. You have to hear it to believe it in many cases.

Conclusion

This report has already gone too long, but we thought you might be interested in it. Dick Blackford worked long and hard and should be commended for his valiant efforts for the truth’s sake. We trust that the brethren at the North Side church in Dyersburg will support him well for his work. Mr. Nevil is a fine gentleman in many ways, and we would not seek to take advantage of him here. However, we trust that he will consider the error of his ways and obey the Lord. He has no excuse for not knowing the truth. As an aged man, this marks perhaps his last public debate. We pray for -him and for his brethren who attended the debate.

Truth Magazine XXII: 27, p. 443
July 13, 1978

By P. J. Casebolt

There are those who do not feel that the Scriptures can imply a thing strongly enough for us to act with authority. They argue that one thing is implied to this person, while something different may be implied to another. While this may be true of the doctrines and ideas of men, this is not a necessary implication (there is that term again!) to draw pertaining to God’s word. Man is not wise enough, nor is he able enough, to express every idea so that every person gets the same impression. I believe God is able to convey ideas to His creatures in such a way that they can understand Him, and that these ideas are not just contained in the Scriptures-they are the Scriptures, revealed by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:10-16).

Jesus laid out a certain set of circumstances, with various parts and pieces, then asked a certain man to reach a particular conclusion. Even an insincere lawyer, with questionable motives, was forced to the necessary conclusion that the man who showed mercy was being neighborly (Lk. 10:25-37). Other questions recorded in the Scriptures are so expressed that there can be only one implication, or inference. (See Mark 8:36, 37 and 1 Pet. 4:17, 18.) Not only are there many questions such as these, but also plain declarative statements of inspiration which permit only one inescapable (necessary) conclusion. But, these have been quoted time and time again, often by those who still claim they do not believe in the principle. Some concede the principle is taught in the Scriptures, but doubt that it has any binding force. Well, let me use a teaching technique which may get you to see what I mean. That is just a fancy way of saying that I am going to slip up on your blind side. There are some people who are blind on both sides, even as I have been at certain times in my life, so maybe you will get the lesson before you “see” it coming.

Cow Pasture Parable

No, this is not the same thing as “chimney corner scripture.” This actually happened, and there are people yet alive who can verify it. It has long been contended that one can leave a false impression by what he does not say, as well as by what he does say. One can even imply an untruth in such a way that people form an erroneous conclusion. Take the case of misleading advertising, for instance.

Several of us were playing softball in a cow pasture. A girl came to bat, and asked me the location of first base.. Now, there are things in a pasture besides rocks and sticks. The Bible calls it dung. I never said a word, but walked over and stood beside some of this stuff, and in a dried condition I guess it did have the appearance of first base. Anyway, there was no danger, because this girl always struck out anyway. Everybody knew that. I even walked back toward second base, and sat down on the ground to talk with the second baseman. He suggested weakly that maybe I should tell her where the real first base was, but even he knew she would not hit the ball anyway. But, she did. And, she headed for what she thought was first base!

If you ask me personally sometime, I will tell you the rest of the story. But this is enough for you to get the lesson that one can tell a falsehood by the principle of necessary implication. Now, my question is this: if one can teach an untruth by this principle, why cannot he teach the truth with it? Again, the necessary implication is unescapable: you can.

But, someone will say there is more room for confusion using this principle, than if we used an approved apostolic example. I do not know. While it is true that this latter method is binding, and plainly understood as far as I am concerned, yet there are still others who contend that even an approved apostolic example is not binding unless accompanied by a direct command. Even these ignore the command to observe such an example (Phil 4:9).

Yet, there are others who claim we cannot understand anything except a direct command, and in the absence of such we have no authority for anything we do. Then, you still have those who cannot seem to understand even a direct command, else there would be more people who teach and submit to baptism as an essential part of salvation (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16).

I am persuaded that there are people who will never understand what God wants them to do, regardless of how He tells them, or how plainly He reveals His will. Since the atheist does not want to listen to God any of the time, maybe there are those who just want to listen to God some of the time.

Truth Magazine XXII: 27, pp. 441-442
July 13, 1978