Truth Magazine

By P. J. Casebolt

Among other things, the term evolution can be applied to the gradual development, or disclosure of a thing. Some have tried to use this process in accounting for the existence of man and the universe. I think it can properly be applied to those false teachers’ who arise from among God’s people. In fact, this process, when applied to the development of false teachers, is so nearly identical in every situation that we begin to see a pattern which is followed closely by nearly every false teacher. I do not know in every case whether or not this is done consciously or unconsciously. But, just as surely as many criminals are identified and apprehended by their MO (method of operation), so also can the false teacher be recognized many times by his evolutionary pattern of apostasy. Not only has experience enlightened us on this point, but the word of God abounds with information on the subject.

Case No. 1

The time: late Forties or early Fifties. The place: Columbus, Ohio. (But, it could be Anyplace, USA, Asia, Europe, or Africa.) The congregation initially affected: the old Seventh Avenue church of Christ. The preacher’s name, though known to this writer and several others, is withheld, because we are studying a principle that could include many names. I have cited enough facts to let the reader know this is not a hypothetical case.

At the first, the preacher’s teaching began to change gradually, not so noticeably because of what he said, but because of what he did not say. Then, he began making statements gradually, which statements by themselves gave no evidence of false teaching, and yet, when considered in the light of other statements, began to form a good case of circumstantial evidence. But, you cannot convict a man on such evidence, even in a civil court, especially when the accused will not confess, and steadfastly maintains his innocence. Besides, he was an able preacher of some influence among the brethren in spite of his youth. He had influential relatives, and his grandfather was especially known among the brethren as a sound and able preacher of the gospel. Besides, no one wanted to compromise a young, promising preacher’s influence and reputation.

This continued for several months, and later it was learned that all this time the one under suspicion was privately teaching others, and even succeeded in converting some to his position. Some insisted he was being misunderstood, and falsely accused, and he succeeded in appearing to be the persecuted “underdog,” gaining even more sympathy. Those who dared question him were made to appear as the villains, prompted by jealousy or the desire to nail someone’s hide to the wall.

Finally, the elders called for a showdown. The preacher then admitted that he had continued to baptize people for the space of several months, but that he had ceased to believe it was essential to salvation. He, along with some accomplices, had delved into worldly wisdom, and decided the Bible was not properly translated (or could not be properly understood), and had generally accepted the Calvinistic doctrines taught by Baptists. In spite of all this, he stayed in the pulpit until he was evicted, tearing apart the body of Christ, which he no longer thought to be essential to salvation. When he was forced to leave the pulpit, he identified himself with a local denomination, and began preaching for it. He took some “disciples” with him. And, you could probably still find some brethren who believe he was just a victim of circumstances, that he was “driven” from the church, and that if brethren had loved him more and been more longsuffering toward him, he would still be with us today.

Case No. 2

This preacher was also able, influential, and highly respected throughout the Ohio Valley churches of Christ. (This collection of disciples does not constitute an organization of churches, but is only a geographical designation.) Twenty-five years ago he was already dropping “hints” and questions on certain subjects, generally in private, or before selected audiences. Did Jesus really mean the “mansions” of John 14:1-6 were in heaven, or could he be talking about the church? If so, the church must have already been established at that time. And, further, the church and kingdom must be two separate things.

In 1952, this preacher in question corresponded with a young preacher in Clarksburg, West Virginia, advocating some of the above possibilities. I and another preacher read the correspondence, and helped the younger preacher with his end of the writing. We urged this teacher of strange doctrines to publicly declare himself on these matters, but he said the brethren would not be receptive to his teachings at that time, but would be after they were educated. Some of us knew then (1952) that the church was being troubled by another false teacher, but few believed our reports. Brethren would come away from his meetings where he was preaching, or read his writings in the papers, and say, “I didn’t hear him say anything out of the way.” Some of us were accused of trying to hurt his reputation, or of being jealous, or of misunderstanding him.

Finally, this man converted his son-in-law to his peculiar teachings, and his son-in-law was also a preacher with much ability, influence, and promise among the churches. Brethren just could not believe that this young man could be guilty of believing or teaching such doctrines, and he, along with his father-in-law, continued in the good graces of the brethren despite warnings to the contrary. But now, in the words of a well-known newscaster, the brethren “know the rest of the story,” and have for the past few years.

This is partly true because the son-in-law authored a book containing his false doctrines, with an introduction by his father-in-law! That book was reviewed in the pages of Truth Magazine a few years back. It is the worst (or best) smorgasbord of premillennial positions I have ever seen. Some of it has to be original, with a mixture of doctrines peculiar to Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses! But, you will still find brethren who are sympathetic to these false teachers, and congregations and elderships who have been influenced by them.

Is There A Pattern?

I maintain that most false teachers are caught up in a gradual, evolutionary pattern from which they cannot extricate themselves, even while many of them maintain there is no pattern revealed in the Bible on any subject. The Holy Spirit has given us an abundant amount of evidence pertaining to false teachers, their doctrines and characteristics. Their very nature of trying to hide, conceal, deceive, divert, subvert, and convert makes it necessary for them to follow the pattern. No false teacher is going to confess that they are such, or that their teachings are contrary to truth. Some may even be sincerely convinced they are doing the church a great service, and setting souls in bondage free (2 Pet. 2:19).

Jesus warned of false teachers, and described their conduct (Mt. 7:15-20). Paul wrote much on the subject, and would probably be regarded as an alarmist, and a negativist, but the Holy Spirit says he wrote with the credentials of an apostle (Acts 20:28-31; Gal. 5:1-12; Eph 4:14; Col. 2:4-8, 18-23; 1 Tim. 4:1-6; 2 Tim. 4:1-4).. In fact, Paul warns of this in nearly all his epistles. Peter (2 Pet. 2), John (1, 2 & 3 John), and Jude all speak extensively on the matter. Yet, I get the impression that some brethren still think “there is no such animal” among God’s people! Or, if there is, it is a ghost, and not a real person. And, even if there are false teachers, we have no way of identifying them, and even if we do, there is nothing we can do about it. If you listen to some, no false teacher has ever been handled correctly. Israel murmured when God disciplined Korah and his associates, and he was forced to discipline 14,700 more before He got His message across (Num. 16).

Yes, I believe there is a pattern for us to follow in dealing with erring brethren, including those who teach false doctrines. Our motives must be pure, and without prejudice. We may be able to save some, or teach them “more perfectly” (Acts 19:26; Jas. 5:19, 20; Jude 22, 23). But, when our efforts go unrewarded, how long must we stand by and watch the bride of Christ being mugged, the body of Christ being divided? If the reputation of one false teacher is precious, and some think we should “go slow” lest we harm his influence, what about the rest of the body? Are the ones being subjected to false doctrine not also important? Is not the well-being of the church as important as one of its members? Some in the civil realm think it is high time the victims of a crime be accorded the same privileges as the criminals. Are not the souls of those being led away by false teaching as important as those doing the teaching?

By all means, get the facts, and do not act on suspicion or rumor. Sometimes it is difficult to get facts from those who have every reason to conceal them, but Jesus said, ” . . . by their fruits ye shall know them.” It is a serious thing to take action of any kind which pertains to the Lord’s body, but it is going to be even more serious for some of us if we have to explain why we did not do anything even when we had the facts. And, be sure, the Lord will require it of us, at His coming.

Truth Magazine XXII: 11, pp. 185-186
March 16, 1978

By Leslie Diestelkamp

As surely as Paul declared that the husband is the head of the wife, and thus that he is indeed the head of the family circle, we must also agree that the wife (and mother) is the heart of the family. The poet said it so well when he wrote,

The hand that rocks the cradle, Is the hand that rules the world”. Nations rise and fall, empires prosper or crumble, and men are stirred to greatest accomplishments or they are driven to shameful failure, depending upon the influence of wives and mothers. Perhaps it is correct to say that no human being stoops so low as the immoral, base, promiscuous mother. Jezebel, the wife of Ahab (1 Kings 19:2) is recognized as symbolic of all that is evil-of deceit, mischief, lying, malice, injustice. Deliliah destroyed a strong man with her deceit; Solomon’s great wisdom did not survive the subtle and evil ways of women (someone has correctly said, “Solomon didn’t have a thousand wives; a thousand wives had him”).

Evil women who stoop so low are put in contrast to those who rise so high! Perhaps no one rises, to such a high plane of moral goodness, compassionate loyalty and dynamic influence as does the godly mother. Mary accompanied her Son all the way to persecution, rejection and to the cross. Hannah molded the life of an infant into a lad who was then possessed with the character to make him one of the greatest prophets of all time (1 Sam. 1:27, 28). Some author, unknown to me said,

Paint her as you see her, artist,

Let the lines and wrinkles show,

And the silver hair that crowns her,

Like a halo’s beautious glow.

Can you picture on your canvas,

All the years of sacrifice,

How she tended well her household,

Evercounting naught the price?

Let your brushes tell the story,

Of her patient love and care,

Mingle love with joy and sorrow,

Just as life has put them there.

Blend your colors softly, artist,

Face her toward the setting sun,

Smiling, calm, serene and peaceful,

For her task is almost done.

Call the portrait simply, “Mother;”

All the world will understand,

Nations thrive and empires prosper,

Guided by her gentle hand.

Motherhood is a great privilege — the crowning joy, the maximum happiness, the sublime fulfillment — for most women. Read the song of Hannah, rejoicing in motherhood (1 Sam. 2:1-10). And perhaps the greatest privilege of motherhood is that of willing, voluntary and enthusiastic sharing. No human being is able to share with others as does a mother; she shares her body with another in order that she might conceive; she shares again, most significantly, with her unborn child, and then she shares her time, her energy, her talent-even her very heart-as she weeps and laughs, as she sorrows and rejoices with her child through the months and years of infancy, adolescence and youthfulness.

But motherhood also involves obligation as well as privilege. No task on earth requires more dedication, greater skill or fuller commitment. The responsibilities of motherhood are not fulfilled passively but they demand devotion to the highest ideals and patient perseverance over long years of time. Yet, especially today, in our sophisticated society, many mothers lack the will and the courage to face the realities of the family circle, and many falter and fail, not because of inability, but because of lack of endeavor. Edgar A. Guest skid,

“There are Mothers who imagine,

Life could give them if it would,

Something richer, something better,

Than the joys of motherhood.”

Perhaps it is safe to say that there is no human obligation that is less adaptable to substitution than motherhood. By that I mean that you can substitute for the teacher, the ball player, the policeman, the governor and almost anyone else, but no one has found an adequate substitute for mother’s love! (Foster parents do great work and are deserving of much praise, but no one knows better than they that they can never achieve every aspect of parenthood that belongs exclusively to the natural mother.)

The greatest writers and speakers of the ages have tried to capture the fullness of glory, the opportunity and the duty of motherhood, and all have failed to maximize it. Naturally, then it is utterly impossible for me to do so, and I shall not even try. So in this chapter, I am not trying to specify every minute detail of duty that comes to mothers, nor am I trying to spell out the intricate items that separate between success and failure, between joy and sorrow. I am simply trying herein to arouse mothers to their God-given duties and to challenge them to respond to the teaching of God’s Word regarding their responsibilities.

Study with me two vivid contrasts: We read: “Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Athaliah the daughter of Omri. He also walked in the ways of the house of Ahab: for his mother was his counselor to do wickedly” (2 Chron. 22:2,3). But for a complete contrast, notice: “When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded in thee also” (2 Tim. 1:5).

Happy are we, and happy the home, when we find a dedicated father and a devoted mother living, loving and laboring in unison to fulfill the duties and to enjoy the opportunities of parenthood. In our next chapter we shall consider “Children: An Heritage of the Lord.”

Truth Magazine XXII: 11, pp. 184-185
March 16, 1978

By Johnie Edwards

The word walk occurs many times in the Bible and is descriptive of one’s living. When the Scriptures refer to the walk of a Christian, reference is made to the way one lives. It means to step rightly. I want us to take a look at a number of Bible rules which must guide the walk of a Christian.

Walk In Truth

David’s charge to his son Solomon is a principle Christians need to learn. “If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul there shall not fail thee a man on the throne of Israel” (1 Kings 2:4). God has always demanded that His people walk in truth. John said, “For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth. I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth” (3 Jno. 4). To walk in truth is to walk according to the word, for the word is truth (Jn. 17:17).

Walk By Faith

Many Old Testament heroes are recorded in the New Testament (Heb. 11) because they walked by faith. Man cannot please God without faith (Heb. 11:6) and the Christian must walk by faith. Paul said, “For we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7). To walk by faith, is to do things for which we can see no reason, but because God said do it.

Walk In The Old Paths

The principle for which Jeremiah, the weeping prophet, pleaded is one which Christian’s need to heed today. He said, “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls” (Jer. 6:16). But they, like so many today, said, “We will not walk therein” (Jer. 6:17). Too many want to modernize God’s way but it will just not work!

Walk In The Light

John said, “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin (1 Jn. 1:7). To walk in the light is to walk as the word directs, for the light is a “light unto my path” (Psa. 119:105).

Walk In Christ

After a person has been “baptized into Jesus Christ” (Gal. 3:27), he must then walk in Christ. Paul told the members at Colosse, “As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord so walk ye in him” (Col. 2:6). Too many church members are content to just be baptized into Christ and then fail to walk in Him. Walking in Christ is just as vital as being baptized into Him.

Walk Uprightly

God expects His people to walk uprightly. The Psalmist asked, “Lord, who shall dwell in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy Hill?” Then he answered, “He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart” (Psa. 15:1-2). Solomon said that God is a “buckler to them that walk uprightly” (Prov. 2:7). Let’s strive to walk uprightly in ’78.

Truth Magazine XXII: 11, p. 183
March 16, 1978

By Weldon E. Warnock

Following is an article that appeared recently in a church’s bulletin. It was written by the preacher of the church that publishes the bulletin. The article does not represent the congregation.

Much is said about the “plan of salvation:” II to preached more than any other subject. Brethren proclaim the “plan” everywhere. They go door-to-door and tell their neighbors about it. And few listen, and hardly any respond. Frustration has set in throughout the Lord’s body. Why can’t people see the plain truth of the “gospel plan of salvation”?

The answer to that question should be obvious to everyone. Because the “plan of salvation” Is not scriptural! The words “plan” or “scheme” do not appear one time in the entire Bible. Yet we speak of the “plan” as if it were really there. Now, what we are talking about is belief, repentance, confession, and baptism, which when lumped together we have been calling the “plan of salvation:” The kindest thing we can say about the expression is that it is a misnomer. But if we took at it honestly and clearly, we would see that calling these things “plan of salvation” borders on false doctrine. For when we speak of belief, repentance, confession and baptism, and call that the “plan of salvation”, we lure those things into our Savior. But the Bible teaches that Jesus is our Savior (Matt. 1:21). Furthermore, it sounds like we are saying that our doing of those things will save us because we therefore are entitled to ft. But the Bible says we are “saved by grace” . . . . through faith, anti that not of yourselves, it Is the gift of God, not of works, that no man should glory” (Eph. 2:8, 91. I say it sounds like ft. I know that my brethren do not believe such. (But to hear some talk-I wonder.)

More importantly, when we proclaim thin “plan” we give the impression to those we are trying to convert that the “plan” saves. In fact, we do without doubt try to convert them to “our plan”. The Baptists have a “plan”. So do the Methodists, Pentecostals, etc. So we counter “their plans” with one of our own. It’s not unlike a group of children quarreling over the rules of a game. The world looks at all us “Christians” fighting over a “plan” and they wonder shy. And we wonder why they can’t see the difference. From their standpoint one plan Is as good as another.

THEREIN LIES, THE KEY. If our salvation depended on a plan or procedure or our own doing, it would not matter which. “plan” we chose. The Jews had s “plan” but failed (Rom. 9:31cf). They could not see that the “real plan” was Christ (Rom. 9:33; 10:4). The real scheme of redemption is what God purposed to do through Christ, which He has done. Read Eph. 1:314 and see the real plan of salvation (vs. 9), which Is the gospel of Christ (vs. 13; 1 Cor. 15:1-4), which Is Christ crucified (1 Cor. 1:23). The apostles did not preach: “believe, repent, confess, baptize”. They preached the gospel; which is Christ! (1 Cor. 1:17).

Is it necessary for us to believe, repent, confess and be baptized? YES! But only as our response to what Christ has done. What we do does not save us (Emphasis mine, wew). Christ is our Savior and He is our Plan.

-by Billy c. Williams

The above author, as you probably noticed, has no qualms in calling the gospel the “plan of salvation,” even though he says the expression, “plan of salvation,” cannot be found one time in the entire Bible. How about “way of salvation” (Acts 16:17), or “way of truth” (2 Pet. 2:2), or “way of righteousness” (2 Pet. 2:21)? He is disturbed about calling belief, repentance, confession and baptism the “plan of salvation.” If he means the whole plan of salvation, certainly belief, repentance, confession and baptism are not the sum total of it. But if he means that the conditions of obedience for an alien sinner are not a plan for their salvation, then he is dead wrong. And, he is dead wrong because this is what he said.

A plan means, “Methods or scheme of action, procedure, or arrangement” (Webster). Has not Jesus given a method of action to alien sinners? He surely has! Then, He has given a “Plan of salvation.” To call the specific acts that aliens obey, “plan of salvation,” no more excludes the rest of the gospel than Peter excluded grace or belief or repentance when he said, “baptism doth also now save us” (1 Pet. 3:21).

What kind of semantical game is the writer trying to play when he declares that calling belief, repentance, confession and baptism, “plan of salvation,” as bordering on false doctrine? Since when is it false doctrine to call something what it is? The commands to an alien sinner constitute the plan, method of action, for his salvation. He says the reason for it bordering on false doctrine is that we make the acts of obedience, by calling them, “plan of salvation,” our Savior: H this is tine, there is no bordering on false doctrine-it is false doctrine. But he goes on to say that none of his brethren believes they are the Savior, so I do not know why all the “fuss” over brethren calling something what it is.

Salvation Is Conditional

Brethren, does Jesus save an alien, conditionally? “Oh, yes!” Then, He has a plan of salvation for aliens. Call it “conditions of salvation,” or “scheme of salvation,” or “plan of salvation.” After it is all said and done, there are conditions incurred in the saving of sinners. Calling it “plan of salvation,” in its proper context and within the frame of reference is not a misnomer, but is identifying the scriptural precedure enjoined upon alien sinners.

Certainly, the plan of salvation involves Jesus and His grace. Paul said, “. . . by grace ye are saved” (Eph. 2:5). But does grace save us without conditions? Absolutely not! Neither does the cross or the gospel. The Bible says that faith saves (Acts 16:31), repentance saves (2 Cor. 7:10), confession saves (Rom. 10:10), and baptism saves (1 Pet. 3:21). Were these inspired writers bordering on false doctrine when they said these things save us? Peter told the Jews, “Save yourselves (emphasis mine, wew) from this untoward generation” (Acts 2:40). Was Peter denying that Jesus was Savior by such exhortation?

Notice that he underlined in Eph. 2:8-9, “gift of God, not of works. . .” What is this supposed to mean in regard to belief, repentance, confession and baptism? Is he implying that these works of righteousness are the meritorious works that Paul was writing about in Eph. 2:9? Maybe you can figure out what he meant. Apparently, he is confused as to what kind of works Paul had in mind. Paul certainly did not mean works of faith (Jn. 6:28-29) or works of righteousness (Acts 10:34-35) as these works must be done in order to be saved. In fact, Paul gave faith as a condition in Eph. 2:8 and faith is a work (Jn. 6:28-29).

Jesus and the Plan

The author tells us the Baptists, Methodists and Pentecostals have a “plan,” and if we have “plan,” we are. just like them. But their “plan” is somewhat like the writer’s above-Jesus the Man, but no gospel demands. In fact, a Baptist preacher could have written the article in all good conscience. I wonder how the writer would convert a Baptist if he does not teach them, among other things, what Jesus said on baptism. Is he just going to tell them about the death, burial and resurrection in order to change them on the purpose of baptism or the establishment of the church or the impossibility of apostasy? I was under the impression that Baptists already believe in the death, burial and resurrection.

Listen friends, the gospel contains facts to be believed, commands to be obeyed and promises to be enjoyed. The above writer wants us to think that the gospel just consists of the facts. But there are commands to be obeyed, also. He wrote, “The apostles did not preach: ‘believe, repent, confess, baptize.’ They preached the gospel, which is Christ () Cop. J: J 7)J” Here we learn (?) that “believe, repent, confess, baptize” are no part of the gospel. I wonder if this brother ever preaches a sermon on faith or repentance or baptism? If he does, according to him, he is not preaching the gospel.

Judge yourself as to whether the apostles preached faith, repentance, confession and baptism. On Pentecost, Peter told the Jews, `Repent and be baptized . . . .” (Acts 2:38). Again, “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized” (Acts 2:41). Sounds like Peter preached .baptism somewhere along the line. At the household of Cornelius, Peter was sent to tell them words whereby they could be saved (Acts 11:14). Among those words was baptism (Acts 10:48). I am getting the feeling that Peter preached baptism-that he was a “plan” preacher.

Observe the preaching of Paul. At Philippi, he spoke to Lydia and she was baptized. How did she learn of baptism if Paul did not preach it? The Philippian jailer was baptized the same hour of the night after Paul spoke the word of the Lord unto’him (Acts 16:30-33). By the way, Paul preached first that he must “believe” (v. 31). Yet, the writer of the above article said the apostles did not preach “believe, repent, confess, baptize.” They preached much more, but to say they did not preach these commands is inexcusable blindness.

Finally, this brother wrote, “What we do does not save us.” Yes, you read it correctly. No, a Baptist preacher did not say it, but a preacher in the church of Christ. He stated that we have to believe, repent, confess and be baptized, but only in response to what Christ has done. He did not say “in response to what Christ has commanded,” but “in response to what Christ has done.” I thought we were to be baptized, for example, because Jesus commanded it (Mt. 28:19; Mk. 16:16; Acts 10:48). How could one properly respond to Jesus if he were not told in the gospel what to do?

If what we do does not save us, then why did Peter say, “baptism saves us” (1 Pet. 3:21)? Did not Peter know that the gospel saves or that Jesus saves? Certainly he did, but Peter knew that the gospel has conditions and these must be met. Whatever man is told to do by Jesus Christ has a part to play in man’s salvation. Man complies with these conditions and thereby saves himself (Acts 2:40; cf. 1 Pet. 1:22).

Let’s not be guilty of trying to separate Jesus from what He said. We can only know Jesus by His Word. We can only come to Jesus by His Word. We will be judged by His Word.

Truth Magazine XXII: 11, pp. 181-183
March 16, 1978