Truth Magazine

By Wallace H. Little

Phil. 2:25 reads, “Yet I suppose it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and companion in labor, and fellow soldier, but your messenger and he that ministered to my wants.” 2 Cor. 8:23 states, “Whether any do inquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellow helper concerning you: or our brethren be inquired of, they are the messenger of the churches and the glory of Christ.” 1 Cor. 16:3, 4 records, “And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem. And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me.” Phil. 4:14-18 tells the same story; in part, it reads: “. . . But I have all, and abound: I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you . . . . ” Acts 24:17 reads, “Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.” Acts 11:29, 30 says, “The disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judea; which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.” Acts 6:1-6 records, “. . .look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business . . . .”

From these Scriptures, we conclude that the messengers for distribution of help were approved men, known or known of by the assisting saints, and personally familiar with the need. Further, since there were adequate grounds for approval, trust in their integrity and fairness was well founded; they were “honest men” as required. They were personally accountable and acceptable both to the ones sending the aid and those receiving it.

In the Philippines, in August of 1976, tidal waves smashed into the coast of Mindanao. When the news reached the United States, several of us raised what help we could. Nearly 9630,000.00 of this was sent to one man I recommended. A large portion of it was properly used. Yet accounting left little doubt some could have been misappropriated. Since I was one of those recommending him, I bear a major share of the responsibility. I ask the forgiveness of all for my carelessness in not insuring that the requirements of a messenger were met.

At the end of the civil strife in Nigeria, nearly $100,000.00 was sent for relief of needy brethren there. One American preacher acted as messenger. He was known of the contributing United States churches and individual saints. He insured that the benevolence was distributed as it was needed, personally verifying the need. Virtually all the money was used for benevolence, its intended purpose. The difference between Nigeria and the 1976 Philippine situation was in the messengers. The result in the Philippines: questionable handling of part of the fund, and consequent distrust among United States brethren concerning the integrity of saints there. And more, the jeopardy of the soul of the man who did the distribution.

Greater wisdom on my part in applying scriptural principles could have resulted in the selection as a messenger an American preacher familiar with the work and the need there, one known or known of and approved by brethren here in the United States. Then he personally could have overseen the distribution of the benevolence, as happened in Nigeria. A proper messenger would have insured that all went to meet the need, and that the distribution was fair and equitable.

There would, of course, have been his expenses. But these would have been far less than the improperly accounted-for funds. And the brother who actually handled the distribution would not have been in danger of falling before the temptation of such a large sum of money. I am not the only one having second thoughts on this. Both Jim Needham in Torch and Connie W. Adams in Searching the Scriptures have written on it. Their comments stimulated my thinking.

Truth Magazine XXII: 12, pp. 200-201
March 23, 1978

By Larry Ray Hafley

From the “Baptist Herald,” a publication of MidContinent Baptist College, Mayfield, Kentucky, we have salvaged the following:

“WHY I AM A BAPTIST”

1. Because I am requested to do so. 1 Peter 3:15.

2. In Jude verse 3 I am commanded to contend for the true faith.

3. In Ephesians 3:21 I see that the church is for the glory of God.

4. To be for His glory the church must be built by Jesus, not by men.

5. In my study I found an others except Baptists began with some man.

6. The church must come out of Palestine and only Baptists did that.

7. Must preach only what glorifies God. Baptists only do that.

8. Must rightly interpret the two ordinances. Baptists only do that.

9. Must have the proper rules governing the church. Baptists only do so.

10. Did Jesus set up and commission His church while on earth? Answer: He surely did thus not on Pentecost. John 17:4.

11. The Bible teaches salvation apart from any church. Baptists only do so.

Preliminary Observations

First, this terse outline reveals that denominational doctrine has not changed. The same old arguments are still being used. Second, some denominational churches contend for what they believe. It is sometimes argued that “the denominations don’t care anymore, so why should we fight them?” The points above squelch and squash that idea. Third, there is a constant need to stress the fundamentals of the faith. One must not tire of sermons on the establishment of the church.. Each generation must be grounded in the elements and rudiments of the truth regarding the church of the Lord.

Response To The Eleven Points

1. 1 Peter 3:15 says nothing about one being a Baptist or anything else. One is made to wonder why, though, if 1 Peter 3:15 requests us to be Baptists, that Peter said, “If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed” (1 Peter 4:16). Or, what is the same, if Peter had requested us to be Christians, would he then have advocated that we suffer as Baptists?

2. The inference from the second point is that the Baptist faith is the true faith and that being a Baptist is part of that. It necessarily follows, then, that all other faiths are false. That indicts the Methodists, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, Lutherans, and Campbellites. In fact, it condemns everyone but the Baptists. However, we need not fear. Jude is not a Baptist epistle. It speaks and warns of apostasy in almost every verse. No Baptist preacher should have written it, therefore, Jude 3 has not reference to Baptists, nor to the Baptist faith.

3. I grant that “the church is for the glory of God.” Must I be in the Baptist church to glorify God? If so, I cannot do it in the Methodist church. But the author argues that salvation can be obtained “apart from any church” (See point number 11). Is it conceiveable that salvation is apart from the glory of God?

4. True; so, the conclusion is that Jesus built the Baptist church. If He did, no mention of it is made in the New Testament, unless it has escaped my notice.

5. This is an assertion. What New Testament “study” would reveal what the author states?

6. The church of Christ came out of Jerusalem which is in Palestine. That would qualify the Lord’s church. Again, where do we read of Baptists coming out of Palestine? We read of the Lord’s people, but not of Baptists.

7. So, Methodists and Presbyterians do not glorify God with their preaching. That makes the Baptists sound like those “narrowminded,” “Pharisaical” Campbellites!

8. The two ordinances referred to are baptism and the Lord’s supper. This simply means that the Baptists are the only ones who teach the truth on baptism and the Lord’s supper. Did any Baptist preacher ever say, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved?” Did any Baptist preacher ever tell sinners to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins? Did any Baptist preacher ever tell a sinner to be baptized and wash away his sins? No, they have never done so, and yet they say they are the only ones who “rightly interpret” the two ordinances. If they are no closer on the Lord’s supper than they are on baptism, the claim is a farce.

9. The proper rules for governing the church are found in the New Testament and not in a Baptist Manual. Are the Baptists the only ones who take the New Testament and govern by it? If so, where are their “elders in every church” (Acts 14:23)? But, again, this condemns the Lutherans and Pentecostals, too. Surely, these Baptists do not think they are the only ones going to heaven!

10. John 17:4 no more excludes Pentecost than it does the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Those events had not taken place before John 17:4. Were they not a part of Jesus’ work? Further, John 17:4 came before the commission of Matthew 28:18-20; Mk. 16:15, 16; Lk. 24:47-49. If it cuts out the establishment of the church on Pentecost in Acts 2, then it unwittingly cuts out the commission!

11. If salvation is taught apart from any church, and that would include the Lord’s, then salvation is apart ,from the blood of Christ. Jesus purchased the church with his own blood (Acts 20:28). He died for the church, and He is its savior (Eph. 5:23-25). The blood of Christ is connected with the church. If salvation is not a part. of the church, then, one may say, “The Bible teaches salvation apart from the blood of Christ.” That is the blasphemous conclusion of the argument.

The answers to these eleven points are why I am not a Baptist.

Truth Magazine XXII: 12, pp. 199-200
March 23, 1978

By Johnie Edwards

There are two men in the Old Testament I would like to call to your attention who walked with God. “Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God” (Gen. 6:9). Noah was said to have walked with God because his faith led him to obey God (Gen. 6:22; Heb. 11:7). “And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him” (Gen. 5:24). He was a man who pleased his God (Heb. 11:5). When we through faith, believe and obey God, we can please Him and we, too, can walk with Him.

Walk In Good Works

A lot of people misunderstand who is to do good works but the Bible teaches that every individual Christian is to walk in good works. Paul said, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). The Christian is to do good when he has the opportunity (Gal. 6:10). One reason for walking in good works is that others may see our light shining and, as a result, glorify God (Mt. 5:16).

Walk In The Spirit

Paul told the Galatians, “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit” (Gal. 5:25). Christians must be led by the Spirit, (Gal. 5:18) and this is done as we follow the directions of the Spirit as laid down in the Word of God. When one fails to obey the Word, he is failing to walk in the Spirit.

Walk Worthy Of Our Vocation

Paul admonished the Ephesians, “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called” (Eph. 4:1). Being a Christian is a vocation and one must walk worthy of it.

Walk Like Christ Walked

Peter said that Christ left us an example that we should follow His steps (1 Pet. 2:21). John said, “He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked” (1 Jn. 2:6). To walk like Christ walked is to act like He acted.

Walk In The Newness Of Life

After one has heard, believed and been baptized, he then must rise to walk in the newness of life as we learn from Paul’s teaching to the Romans. “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:3-4). A Christian is a new creature in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17).

Truth Magazine XXII: 12, pp. 197-198
March 23, 1978

By Earl Robertson

Matthew records this statement, “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). What good news for sin-laden people!

The Jews had the Law of Moses for fifteen hundred yeas, but that law could not take away sin (Rom. 8:3). That law was not given to take away sin, and it never so functioned (Heb. 8:7ff). The Old Testament vas dedicated by the blood of animals and the New Testament of Christ was dedicated by the Blood of Jesus (Heb. 9). Paul was a Jew (Acts 22:3) and lived as a Jew tinder the law. As Paul grew and was taught the law (“know the Lord, know the Lord”-Heb. 8:11), he found it did not give life, but rather death (Rom. 7:10, 24). The illustration of his own wretchedness also emphasizes the way out of sin — “I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 7:25).

Jesus saves from sin! He does not save from accidents, local or national upheavals and catastrophes touching humanity. He died “for the redemption of the transgressions” of mankind (Heb. 9:15).God demanded death for sin, but the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin (He b. 10:4). Since God demanded the shedding of Blood for remission of sins (Heb. 9:22), He “gave His only Son” to die (John 3:16). Jesus was “a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief’-our sorrows and our griefs (Isa. 53:3,4). When He was “wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities; God saw the travail of His soul, and was satisfied (Isa. 53:5, 11).

Jesus does not save people against their will. It is on the basis of “whosoever will” (Rev. 22:17). This is not what the creeds of men teach. Some human creeds teach “irresistible grace.” Some teach that God through Christ saves some men against their own wishes! Yet, in the words of Jesus the Savior, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). The invitation to “come” expresses action on the part of the sinner; it means the sinner, being away from the Savior and life itself, can come to the Savior. Salvation is offered only in Christ (2 Tim. 2:10).

Truth Magazine XXII: 12, p. 197
March 23, 1978