Truth Magazine

By Dennis Lynd

On March 1, 1975, I began working with the congregation that meets in Pontiac, Illinois. The congregation here is small with a Sunday morning attendance of about 45 people. There is little to distinguish Pontiac as a community with the exception that it is the county-seat of Livingston County and the location of one of the state’s maximum security prisons.

On November 7, 1975, I entered the prison for the first time with the hopes of taking the gospel of Christ to some of the inmates. On that occasion I met a number of residents who were interested in spiritual matters. There was one inmate that I would particularly like to bring to your attention. Edmund Lopes No. 15286 was the head of the board-of-deacons for the Pontiac Bible Church in the Correctional Center at the time I entered the prison. Edmund had a great amount of influence and respect among the other inmates having worked with them for a number of years in spiritual matters.

Through the close of 1975 and the first two months of 1976, Edmund and I corresponded and I would visit with a group of men on the first of every month. Towards the end of March, Edmund and I had our first personal visit. On that occasion Edmund inquired concerning the Scriptural teaching on baptism. Prior to this time the Chaplain had substituted sprinkling for immersion. After studying the Scriptures together, Edmund realized the necessity of immersion for the remission of sins and expressed a desire to be baptized into Christ.

Leaving our visit, Edmund joined a discussion that was under way between the board-of-deacons and Chaplain Reynolds. They were discussing the legitimacy of sprinkling for baptism. Armed with passages of Scripture, Edmund showed the error of the course they had previously pursued and asked to be allowed to be immersed. Edmund and I were both told that the prison did not have the facilities for baptism even though we both knew that on at least two occasions the Jehovah’s Witnesses had been allowed to use the whirlpool in the prison hospital for this very purpose.

After the board-of-deacons decision to no longer use sprinkling for baptism, the Chaplain did it at least once more. As a result of his action, Edmund and four other members of the six-man board-of-deacons left the Protestant Chaplain’s program.

On April 1, amid religious confusion and departures from the Protestant Chaplain’s Program, Edmund was removed from the regular prison population and placed in segregation which is the closest thing our prisons have to solitary confinement. Edmund’s ticket, his appearance before the prison court-line, and his placement in segregation were all done in a most irregular manner. I visited Edmund on April 1 and he requested that I get an outside lawyer to look into the matter.

On April 2, I went to the prison accompanied by a local lawyer. Prison officials would not allow the lawyer to enter the prison to look into the matter.

Finally, after an investigation was held by the state’s Administrator of Chaplaincy Services, Robert Horn, Edmund was allowed to be immersed on May 7, 1976. Five days later, amid great fanfare and publicity, a baptistry was brought into the prison and Chaplain Reynolds immersed 15 inmates and the newspapers raved that “the institution at Pontiac has been a forerunner in recognizing the religious freedoms of prisoners” (Bloomington Pantagraph, 5/13/76). At that time the spokesman for the Department of Corrections admitted that there had been a “flood” of requests for the religious rite and that there “has been a swelling of fundamental Christianity inside prison walls recently-fundamentalism which holds that a person is not properly baptized unless he has been totally immersed in water” (Ibid.).

Over the past two years Edmund and I have tried to work through channels to arrange a Bible class and worship service within the prison here. All of our efforts have been to no avail. Finally, last November, Edmund filed suit against Governor Thompson and the Department of Corrections on the grounds that he was being denied the freedom to exercise his religion.

In January, 1978, I made a trip to Houston, Texas to discuss with Brother Roy Cogdill the merit of the case. Brother Cogdill saw merit in the case and suggested that we contact Brother Elliott Ozment to help us with the case. Brother Ozment is presently on the Tennessee State Legislature and his law firm has agreed to represent us in court. Brother Ozment will be challenging the chaplain system on the basis that it is a union of church and state that violates the Constitution of the United States. The Attorney General of Illinois is representing the defendants and it is probable that the case will go to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Crawford Ozment law firm expect that their commitment will involve $15,000 worth of time. This they are donating. We are presently trying to raise $5,000 to cover the out-of-pocket expense (travel, motels, meals, etc.). This money needs to be raised before these men become our attorneys-of-record. Because of the pressure from the state’s lawyers, there is a need for these men to become our attorney’s-of-record sometime in May, 1978.

We would encourage you to consider helping us in this good work. We are seeking the support of individuals and not churches. Thank you for your consideration. If you are able to help in this matter, make checks payable to Lopes-Lynd Fund and mail them to Allen Roth, 802 N. Mill, Pontiac, IL 61764.

Truth Magazine XXII: 26, p. 423
June 29, 1978

By Ron Halbrook

What do you do with bulletins, gospel papers, memeographed lessons, and other printed teaching materials after reading them? After one use, often such material is thrown out or laid aside. Why not put such materials to good use? We are on this earth to do all the good we can, by whatever means is at our disposal. After we benefit from using teaching materials that come into our hands, we should give thought to sharing that benefit with others. This is one way to plant the seed of truth along the way in life. Freely we have received good from the word in print, and freely we should extend that good to others.

Our family and friends could learn from these lessons in print. Brethren in foreign lands, such as in Africa and in the Philippines, are begging for such material. Eyewitness accounts have come of such printed teaching material being passed from hand to hand, village to village, and town to town until it literally falls to pieces! As a song says, why so thoughtless do we linger while the fleeting days go by? Too often we neglect the simple things we can do, and excuse ourselves by talking about things we cannot do.

Young preachers like myself can benefit from lessons taught in the past, if someone would be so thoughtful as to offer them to us. We do not “inherit” an understanding of past battles, losses, victories, failures, and successes-and older saints are sometimes heard lamenting our lack of perspective about such things. The printed page helps younger men to learn from the struggles of past yeas, but that printed page in the possession of older brethren is often buried in boxes, stored in trunks, or stashed up in attics where no one can use them. Ultimately, they will be thrown out or burned up in “spring cleaning,” perhaps by someone else who has no interest in such things.

For instance, the Bible Banner published in the 1940’s can give insights and perspectives to many of us who were only born in that decade, or since then. Older brethren who took and saved those papers may not think to offer them to younger men now, and in many cases have even forgotten having them stuck back somewhere. When I mentioned this to an older brother a couple of years ago, he said, “You know, now that you mention it, I think I have some of those out back in the chicken coop.” Sure enough, he did. And, he was glad for me to have them, droppings and all! I was glad to get them, droppings or no droppings! I am still searching for most of the Bible Banners and would be glad to hear from some reader. But this article is not intended to simply increase my files. If some older reader has a stack stuck under the bed or in the garage (where they are doing no one but the rats any good), why not offer them to some younger man who will be thrilled and benefitted from something only going to waste now.

Quite a few older readers have back issues of papers printed in the last 25 years, but most young men born within that time cannot obtain those issues. Good lessons can still be learned from old copies of the Gospel Guardian (I am still searching for volumes 4 and 5), Searching the Scriptures (anyone have volume V, numbers 2 and 3; VII, 6 through 12; VIII, 1 through 11; IX, 6 ?), and Truth Magazine (wish I could find volumes I, II, IV, V, VI, VII, IX, 8; XI, 12). Many brethren have these papers stacked or boxed up for years back, and do not know what to do with them. Upon asking, a number of times I have been taken by some brother to the dusty attic of an old garage to look through magazines that ultimately will end up in the trash. While you have the chance to put these into the hands of someone who will use them, why not do so? Mention what you have not only to younger preachers but also to any younger men who are active in the Lord’s work. Not everyone will be interested, but those who are will not be able to thank you enough!

While on the subject of sharing the printed page, many of you can also do someone good by sending Truth Magazine to them. By sending just one subscription, you will bless someone 50 times a year. Better yet, send 50 blessings a year to ten different homes for only $5.00 per month, or to 20 homes for $10.00 per month. People in foreign lands who do not have the money we have, often write in asking for Truth Magazine but having no way to pay for it. Why not pay for a foreign subscription? In the meantime, do not forget to look in the attic or garage, maybe even under the bed!

Truth Magazine XXII: 26, p. 422
June 29, 1978

By Bobby L. Graham

The Revised Standard Version

This version, a purported revision of the American Standard Version of 1901, has served as a vehicle for modernism since its publication. Its appearance in 1947 was the result of an effort on the part of liberals, especially the liberal National Council of Churches. Its translators were extremely modernistic, denying the inspiration of the Bible and the deity of Jesus Christ.

One of the major faults of this version is its omission of italics whenever words have been supplied by the translators, thus giving no indication of where the sacred text spoke or where the translators spoke.

Another of its major faults is its attack on the miraculous conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary by the Holy Spirit by means of its faulty rendering of “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14 as “young woman” and its change of Mary’s “I know not a man” in Luke 1:34 to “I have no husband.” Another area of the modernistic attack is the deity of Jesus, His being the only begotten Son of God: In John 3:16 and in five other verses the expression “only begotten” is mishandled in such a way as to cast doubt on the deity of Christ and to verify the deliberate attempts of the unbelievers on the translating committee. The New English Bible, the British counterpart in the liberal movement of the Revised Standard Version in the United States, does the same damage in the areas of Jesus’ miraculous conception and His being the only begotten Son of God. That pernicious paperback perversion, Good News for Modern Man, dogs the same thing to Jesus’ deity.

This RSV also butchered Jesus’ avowed relationship to the Law and the prophets in Matthew 5:17 by having him say that he came not to abolish, but to fulfill. To the contrary, He did come to abolish it according to God’s eternal purpose and to enact a better covenant to take its place. Paul even said that the Old Law had been abolished by Jesus’ death on the cross (Eph. 2:15). Yes, the same version has Jesus doing exactly what they have Him saying He did not come to do! The point of Matthew 5:17 is not the abolishment of the Law, but Jesus’ attitude and action toward it. He meant that he did not come to destroy it, to run roughshod over it and to disregard it, but rather to respect it, to observe it, and by so doing to fill it full or to complete it; and that means abolish it!

The final area of fault in the Revised Standard Version that we shall concern ourselves with in this brief study is its omission of the final paragraph of Mark 16, for which there is completely adequate evidence that it was a part of Mark’s original record of the life of Christ. The RSV, however, leaves it out of the text and relegates it to the position of a footnote.

On the basis of these and other glaring weaknesses, the RSV does not deserve a place with the King Tames Version and the American Standard Version. Its poisonous parts are enough to render it unusable for teaching the whole gospel and for propagating New Testament Christianity.

Truth Magazine XXII: 26, pp. 421-422
June 29, 1978

By Mike Willis

But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy. But when I was there they were not straight-forward about the truth of the Gospel, I said to CEPHAS IN THE PRESENCE OF ALL, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?”

Peter’s apostasy was a weakness of the flesh. When the Jews from Jerusalem came to Antioch, he was afraid (2:12) of what their reaction might be when they saw him eating with Gentiles in violation of the law of Moses. Consequently, he withdrew from them and stood aloof. The rest of the Jews in the congregation at Antioch followed his lead, including Barnabas, Paul’s devoted companion.

Many of my brethren are telling me that sins which come as a result of weakness of the flesh are automatically covered by God’s grace. They write that the perfect obedience of Christ is imputed to the believer so that sins pertaining to weaknesses of the flesh are automatically forgiven by God. Yet, Paul said, “he stood condemned” (2:11). Now, who am I to believe, my brethren who ,say that the perfect obedience of Christ is imputed to the believer to cover such sins which come as a weakness of the flesh, or the apostle Paul who said that Peter was condemned? I choose Paul, what about you?

We observe also Paul’s method of handling this disagreement. Instead of just “lovingly overlooking these differences,” Paul withstood Peter, as the ringleader of the apostasy, to his face. He publicly rebuked him-in the presence of all. Who can believe that Peter’s apostasy was of such a nature that he was denying the seven facts of the gospel or the one act that brought one into fellowship with God. If the gospel-doctrine distinction were true, this apostasy was a doctrinal apostasy. Yet, Paul could not extend fellowship to the man who was apostatizing; instead, he publicly rebuked him. I would that some of my “grace-unity” brethren would take a lesson from this and spend a little of their time rebuking to the face in the presence of all those brethren who are preaching that instrumental music in worship violates no scriptural principles, that sponsoring church organization is not organizational apostasy, that sending funds from the church treasury to support benevolent homes and colleges is not a violation of the scriptures, and that church involvement in recreation is not a violation of the mission of the church. Instead, they mingle with those who pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ without ever rebuking them of their sins.

Gal. 4:11

I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain.

This passage appears in the context of the Galatians observing days, months and years. By reverting to the observance of these Jewish feast days, the Galatians were recognizing the Mosaical law as binding on them. Consequently, Paul considered their observing of these days as a sign of their belief that the Old Law was still binding on them. To go back to the Old Law and keep its commandments would make Paul’s labor be in vain. Why would his labor be in vain? The reason seems obvious; it would be void of result. He had labored to save the Galatians; if they reverted to observing the Mosaical law, they would be lost and his labor would be worthless, so far as productive fruit was concerned. Hence, this passage is further proof that one could lose his soul through returning to observe the Mosaical law. Doctrinal apostasizes about matters other than the seven facts and the one act are damning.

Gal. 5:2-4

Behold, I Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

This doctrinal apostasy broke one’s relationship with Christ and, consequently, with the disciples of Christ. Those who taught and accepted the doctrine that one had to be circumcised in order to be saved were severed from Christ and fallen from grace; Christ was of no benefit to them. Furthermore, they were morally obligated to obey the entire Mosaical law for the same reason that they felt compelled to obey the ordinance pertaining to circumcision.

Gal. 5:9-10

A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough. I have confidence in you in the Lord, that you will adopt no other view; but the one who is disturbing you shall bear his judgment, whoever he is.

The danger of this doctrine spreading throughout the Lord’s church concerned Paul. He knew that it had to be stopped. Consequently, he expressed the confidence in the Galatians that they would follow his commandments as expressed in this epistle and adopt no other view. Indeed, it is a shame that Paul had not been liberated from the legalism of the Law! Poor soul, he had not yet learned that there are a multitude of views. He did not know that the Lord’s church is divided over thirty-seven thousand different things and that, therefore, we cannot expect everyone to understand the Bible alike. He was naive, so naive that he expected everyone to have the same view of the matter! Pardon my sarcasm, but when I compare what the apostle of inspiration said with what the apostles of the grace-fellowship faction are saying, I get rather upset. These men are denying the gospel which saves us.

Paul again indicated the damning influence , of this heresy which existed among the brethren in the churches of Galatia. He said, “the one who is disturbing you shall bear his judgment, whoever he is.” Like the passage in 1:6-9 and 2:11, this passage indicates that this doctrinal apostasy would damn one’s soul. Even if the gospel-doctrine distinction were true, one would still be obligated to prove that deniers of doctrines revealed in God’s holy word can be received in the fellowship of the saints. Passages such as the one which we are studying certainly would negate the premise. Paul expected everyone to adopt the same view; those who did not would bear his judgment.

Gal. 6:1

Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of gentleness; looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted.

As I read the literature that is circulating among us, I see articles written which imply that the man who sins through ignorance or through the weakness of his flesh will not be held accountable for these sins. To these people, the grace of God is somehow automatically extended to forgive these men, whether through the imputation of the perfect obedience of Christ to the believer’s account or through some other theological manipulation. Yet, this passage shows that the man who is “overtaken” (AV) in a fault is guilty of sin, separated from God and in need of restoration. “The point of the prolempthe is that Paul has in view a fault into which the brother is betrayed `unaware,’ so that it is not intentionally wrong” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. TV, p. 14). This sin committed in ignorance was not automatically covered by the grace of God. Though it occurred “unawares,” the man was still guilty before God and in need of restoration. A saved man does not need to be restored. The man who is separated from God is the man in need of restoration. Hence, this passage shows that those who are unintentionally guilty of transgressing God’s holy commandment stand guilty before God and in need of salvation.

Conclusion

Those among us who are willing to extend the right hand of fellowship to false brethren among us, need to learn the lessons pertaining to fellowship found in the book of Galatians. Apparently, those who extend the right hand of fellowship to those who are using instrumental music in worship, supporting from the church treasury missionary societies, distorting the government of the local church through the sponsoring church arrangement, perverting the mission of the church through involvement in church support of recreation, education, and benevolence of non-Christians, etc. do not view these men as false teachers. If one reads their writing, he will soon see that this is the case. They engage in no exposure of these sins; rather, the only sin that they seem interested in exposing is the “sin” of exposing false teachers!

The situation in these papers resembles to a greater degree than I like to admit what I see going on in America. In America, Anita Bryant is castigated for condemning the sinful homosexual. In the church, the man who exposes these false teachers for what they are is the can condemned. A man can call for church involvement in any activity he may desire with impunity in the eyes of the majority of the brethren, but let him expose one of these false brethren who are involving the church in sinful activities, and he becomes a “troublemaker.”

My brethren, we need to go back to the Bible to let it be our guide in matters pertaining to whom we will fellowship and how much false doctrine can be tolerated. When we decide to conform ourselves to the Scriptures, we will not be arguing among ourselves over whether or not those who pervert the work and worship of the church can remain in the fellowship of the saints.

Truth Magazine XXII: 26, pp. 419-421
June 29, 1978