Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

As we live in a world beset by the problem of unabated inflation, we are constantly asking what certain goods cost. What they cost yesterday is usually different from what they cost today. We live in a world of high prices. There seems to be no stopping of inflation. Despite the fact that prices are going up in every other aspect of life, Americans want a cheap religion, one which costs them nothing-no time, no money, and no sacrifices. Because of the attitudes which many have toward their religion, I think that it will be profitable for us to consider the price of Christianity.

What Christianity Cost Christ

When I think of the price of Christianity, I begin thinking of what Christianity cost our Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus existed in the beginning with God; He was in the form of God and, thus, had all power under His authority. There was not one thing which He could want but that it was within His power to have it. But, Christianity cost Jesus the sacrifice of such a blessed state to come and live as a man.

Having become a man, Jesus lived as a carpenter’s son. He could have been king of all of the earth, reigning on the throne of His choice. But Christianity demanded a cross instead of a crown. Hence, He lived as a carpenter’s son and did what carpenter’s sons do. His was no life of luxury.

While upon this earth, Jesus endured much mistreatment. We think sometimes of the agonies of the cross but forget some of the things which Jesus endured prior to His crucifixion. Consider some of the things which Jesus endured prior to the crucifixion:

1. He was betrayed by one of His close friends. Judas had been hand-picked by Jesus to be one of His apostles. For three years, they had been in close association with each other and, no doubt, Jesus had come to love Judas as He did the rest of the apostles. Yet, Judas betrayed Him. With a kiss, the most intimate expression of love, Judas identified Jesus to His enemies. Anyone who has been mistreated by those whom He thought were his friends knows how Jesus’ heart ached when Judas betrayed Him.

2. He was physically punished prior to His trial. At the house of Annas, one of the Jewish officers struck Jesus with his hand (Jn. 18:22). Before Caiaphas, the Jews spat in Jesus’ face, beat Him and slapped Him (Mt. 26:67-68). When before Herod, the soldiers “set Him at nought, and mocked Him …. arraying Him in gorgeous apparel” (Lk. 23:11). Pilate had Jesus scourged (Jn. 19:1). The soldiers stripped Jesus, put a scarlet robe on Him, plaited a crown of thorns which they placed on His head, put a reed in His right hand, offered mock worship to Him and spat in His face (Mt. 27:27-30). Can you imagine the Lord of Glory enduring such humiliation from man whom He created? He had the power to call ten thousand angels to defend Himself but He willingly endured such mistreatment from the hands of ungodly men.

Having endured all of these agonies prior to His crucifixion, the Son of Man was then taken outside the city and crucified. They nailed His hands to the cross and then did the same to His feet. I can remember, as a kid, stepping on a rusty nail when playing at a friend’s house. I can remember some of the pain that went with that. Yet, I did that accidentally. I cannot imagine the physical and mental anguish which Jesus must have felt when the Roman soldier took his hammer and spike and drove it through Jesus’ hands and feet.

Having nailed Jesus to the cross, the Roman soldiers would then have placed the cross in the hole which they had dug for it in the ground. Lifting the cross, they let it drop into the hole which they had dug for it. No doubt, as the cross on which Jesus hung fell into its hole, Jesus’ body sagged against the nails. His flesh was torn by sagging against the nails. The pain must have been intense.

In addition to the physical pain which Jesus endured while hanging on the cross, there was also mental anguish. Can you imagine the horrible feeling which must have welled up inside of Jesus as He witnessed a crowd of people who gathered to watch Him die? My father has a picture of a public hanging which occurred in Groveton, Texas in the early 1900’s. There must have been a thousand people (that is a lot of people for a town of one thousand) who had gathered to watch a man be hung. There was a similar crowd gathered to watch Jesus die.

The crowd hurled one insult after another at Jesus. “Ha! thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself, and come down from the cross” (Mk. 15:29-30). “He saved others; let him save himself, if this is the Christ of God, his chosen” (Lk. 23:35). “And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, Art not thou the Christ? save thyself and us” (Lk. 23:39). Yet, Jesus endured these insults without so much as trying to retaliate.

As I think of what Jesus endured, I think of what I would have done had I been in His place. Had I been able to have as much power at my command as Jesus had, I would probably have spoken the word which would have caused some of those who railed the loudest to have died on the spot. I would not have been the meek lamb which Jesus was. But, my friend, Jesus did not act that way because He was paying the high price which Christianity cost.

Christianity came at a high price to Jesus. He had to shed His blood on the cross of Calvary ,in order that the sins of man might be forgiven. A greater price to be paid by Jesus cannot be imagined. He sacrificed more than His possessions; He gave His life for you and me.

The story of the cross is a story of love. God loved us enough to send His Son Jesus to die for our sins. Jesus loved us enough to go through the pre-crucifixion agonies as well as to die on the cross. We had done nothing to deserve the wonderful sacrifice of Jesus; instead, we had acted rebelliously against God, being counted as His enemies. Yet, God still loved us enough to plan the means whereby we could be saved.

Jesus said, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself’ (Jn. 12:32). When Jesus laid this, He was referring to His death. Jesus recognized that the story of His sacrifice in behalf of man was the drawing power of the gospel. That Jesus gave His life as a ransom for our salvation should cause us to love Him and want to express our sincere thanks for what He has done for us. The gospel which details the story of Jesus’ love for us is the only power which God will use to bring men unto Him. If men are not emotionally touched by the story of Jesus and God’s love for us, they are too hard-hearted to be saved.

My friends, Christianity came to man at a very high price. God gave His only begotten Son. Jesus gave His life for us. The price of Christianity was, indeed, very high. Yet, Christianity costs more than just Jesus’ blood. There are some prices which man has to pay (not in the sense of earning his salvation) in order to be saved. We shall consider some of them next week.

Truth Magazine XXI: 41, pp. 659-670
October 27, 1977

By John McCort

In February of 1976, Jady Copeland, Donald Vaughan, and I made a trip to Independence, Missouri to see the three Mormon visitor centers. The city of Independence (a suburb of Kansas City) and the surrounding area is rich in Mormon history. The three centers- are located almost in the heart of Independence. On one street corner is the RLDS Auditorium which houses the world headquarters for the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. On the opposite street corner, directly to the east of the RLDS Auditorium, is the Salt Lake City Mormon visitors center. Directly across the street, to the north of the RLDS center, is the Temple Lot Church of Christ which is a faction of the Mormon church more commonly known as the Hedrickites.

We began by making a tour of the RLDS Auditorium. During our tour we were shown some “conference rooms.” The RLDS church has many different “quorums” such as the “First Presidency,” the “Presiding Bishopric,” the “Council of Twelve,” etc. One of the functions of these quorums is to discuss and vote on the validity of the revelations of divine truth the President-Prophet has received from God through the Holy Spirit. The revelations are then submitted to the membership delegates ,to be voted on during the bi-annual world conference. If the membership delegates approve the revelations they are then incorporated into the Doctrines And Covenants of the RLDS church. Strangely enough the membership cannot in any way amend these revelations. They can reject them but they cannot change them in any way. The President-Prophet is supposed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit and yet the quorums and membership must decide if and when the Holy Spirit revealed something to the President. The membership delegates must also be inspired by the Holy Spirit to make a decision like that because surely mere man could not determine what revelations were divine and what were mere figments of the President’s imagination. The votes at these bi-annual world conferences are very close at times. I have wondered if the Holy Spirit votes against himself at these conferences?

The Salt Lake City Mormon Visitors Center is a very beautiful structure. During our tour of that center (which turned out to be instant chloroform) our tour guide made the claim that the Book of Mormon had been “proved” by modern archaeology to be true. That was a very strange statement to make in view of the fact that the chief Mormon archaeologists claim that archaeology has neither proved or disproved the Book of Mormon. Mormon archaeologists state that not enough is known about the time periods supposedly discussed in the Book of Mormon to verify or discount Mormon claims. (For further information see my article on Mormon Archaeology which was published earlier this year.)

We ended our tour by going through the Temple Lot Church of Christ. They have a small church building located directly north of the RLDS Auditorium. The church is so named because it is built upon the two and three-quarter acre plot that Joseph Smith designated as the lot the temple would be built upon. That lot was set aside as the temple lot August 3, 1831. Shortly thereafter the Mormons were driven out of Jackson County, Missouri. In 1864 Granville Hedrick supposedly received a revelation from God to return to Jackson County, Missouri to begin the regathering of the saints and eventually to rebuild the temple. Hendrick never had aligned himself with the Salt Lake Mormons and thus he was an independent Mormon. Hedrick and about 100 others returned in 1867 and began purchasing the temple lot in 1869. In 1929 they began excavating the site to build the temple. In the process they dug up two markers apparently set by Joseph Smith which designated the ground as being the temple lot. Shortly thereafter the depression ended their efforts to rebuild the temple.

The presence of the Temple Lot Church of Christ (no connection with the Lord’s church) represents a monumental embarrassment to both the Salt Lake and RLDS Mormons. The little Temple Lot Church of Christ claims to be the original Mormon church and has possession of the temple lot to back up their claim. Both the RLDS and Salt Lake groups have unofficially tried to purchase the temple lot for huge sums of money. This little group has steadfastly resisted any efforts to buy the land or force them off of it.

If you are ever in Kansas City, you need to visit these centers. It will be a very educational experience. Avoid the guided tours if possible. They are very boring and time consuming.

Truth Magazine XXI: 42, p. 658
October 27, 1977

By Luther Blackmon

In the Old Testament the amount that Jews had to give is pretty definite. Some think they only gave a tenth. They did not “give” a tenth. They were taxed a tenth. They came more nearly giving 25% than 10 % .

In the New Testament the Lord has left the amount to us–put us on our honor. “Give as prospered;” as we “purpose in our hearts,” “cheerfully.” Have you ever considered the danger inherent in this freedom? If you have not, it is time you did. The very freedom which God has granted us in our giving (as “prospered” and as we “purpose in our hearts”) may be the means of causing us to lose our souls. Seldom have I met a member of the church who was not concerned with the “amount” he should give. And I have found that generally speaking, what he wants to know is how “little” can I give? What is the very least the Lord will accept? He wonders if a tenth, a tithe, will do. Either this fellow does not care or he has not yet learned that the very fact that God did not specify the amount we are to give is the means of testing us.

One fellow asked, “How is a man to treat his wife?” The answer came back, “Love her with all your heart and then just treat her any way you please.” Of course if he loves her with all his heart he would not mistreat her. And I might add that he wouldn’t spend much time wondering if she could make out with one dress and one pair of shoes. Not if he loved her. The Lord knew about this disposition in man before we found out about it. And the Lord knows that if we love Him, we will not have to be told exactly how much we must give. In leaving it up to us He makes it a test of our love for Him and for His church.

If “as he is prospered” means “how little” to you, you need to be converted to Christ-at least on this point. If “as he is prospered” means “how much can I spare and still meet my obligation to my family,” then you have found out why the Lord did not tell us how much to give. Giving is a grace, Paul said. And grace is something God does for us, not something we do for Him. God does not need your money. He does not need you. Then why did He tell us to give? He could have preached the gospel to every man on earth through the medium of angels if He had desired to do it that way. Where then did we get the idea that God needs our money? The only reason on earth that God requires us to give anything is for our benefit — to help us. What other motive could have prompted the Creator of the universe, including man, to ask for the use of our measly, soiled dollars. Ask yourself that question out loud sometime and then be honest with the answer.

Truth Magazine XXI: 41, pp. 653-654
October 20, 1977

By Jeffery Kingry

There is a movement in the religious community (notably on the college campuses) that the denominationalist finds hard to define. “This modern non-redemptive religion is called ‘modernism,’ or ‘liberalism.’ Both names are unsatisfactory . . . the movement is so various in its manifestations that one may almost despair of finding any common name which will apply to all its forms. But manifold as are the forms in which the movement appears, the root of the movement is one: . . . the denial of any miraculous demonstration by God in connection with the origin of Christianity” (Machen, J. G., Christianity and Liberalism, p. 2).

Actually, the word Mr. Machen is looking for is “unbelief.” Modern religious scholars simply do not believe in the New Testament testimony: of itself, or of its core and theme, Jesus the Christ. I do not believe that the unbelief of the scholar and clergy necessarily reflects the views held by the common man, even though these “religious skeptics” would like to think so. The fallacy of equating what goes on in the intellectual community-and only a segment of that-with the whole of society is one that has been so enshrined among academics, that he who questions it is viewed as just a little bit odd.

The modern unbeliever has his “faith” or system of beliefs. He believes in the evolution of man, or his non-miraculous beginning, humanism (that man is the sole determiner of his destiny and role in the world), and moral relativity. He is firmly convinced that before religion can be of any use to “modern man,” that religion must be reconciled to man’s new intellectual attainments. “During the middle decades of the 19th century, the western nations went ‘over the hump of transition’ towards a new ethos of industrial enterprise, urbanization, and rationalism, accompanied with locally varying programmes or creeds like liberalism, evolutionism, socialism, or historicism. These and other ‘isms’ helped to constitute the modern world and made pitiless and merciless rivals of the twentieth century church” (Many, M.E., The Modern Schism, p. 11).

This is the “problem” modern unbelief attempts to solve. Rejecting the person and message of Jesus (because of the miraculous nature of his birth, life, message, and resurrection), and dismissing the inspired record of the Apostles and Prophets (because the claim to plenary inspiration also conflicts with their faith), the modernist seeks to “rescue” a few of the general principles of religion to preserve the “essence of Christianity.” Actually, the modernistic apologist is a kind of “spiritual conservationist,” seeking to preserve a few of the “quaint” and naive gems of a dying religious culture, beaten back by the overpowering forces of man’s growing technology and superior intellect. The modernist view is reflected among (believe it or not) people who claim to be members of Christ’s Church.

Leaving the denominational world (but not going far) we can look to those who claim to have a relationship to Christ in His church, who declare heatedly that the “historical Jesus” is impossible to find because of the obscuring overlay of the “biblical Jesus.” In Mission Magazine, one brother, Warren Lewis writes, ” . . . at the verbal, literal, word-for-word level of the (Gospel) accounts-we are unable in many cases to say what Jesus in fact did or taught. Clashes and jars of this kind are to be found on every page of the gospels.” As to the resurrection, Brother Lewis believes there was one, but as to the record of that resurrection he says that the four-fold record is ” . . . a clashing, jarring jumble; many jangling tongues and contradictory stories.” (Lewis, Warren, “Let’s Look At The Text Again,” Mission, pp. 21-24). I seriously doubt that Lewis believes in the significance or import of the resurrection even though he would not debate the fact of it intellectually. John said that his record was written “that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name” (Jn. 20:31). One cannot reject the testimony of the Christ without rejecting the Christ. And one cannot reject the significance of the Christ without losing the “life through his name” that is extended.

One self-declared Christian even went so far as to array the Christ against His own word: “For all the importance of the Bible, it should not be the true focus of the Christian’s loyalty . . . those who would restore N.T. Christianity should not allow the Bible to compete with (Christ) for authority” (Hunter, “Restoration Theology, A Schoolmaster,” Mission, June, 1974). Obviously Brother Hunter has never read Matt. 7:24ff or Jn. 5 :24-39.

There can be no quarter given in opposing such an attitude towards God and His word. The scriptures are either what they claim to be, or they are nothing. Jesus must be what the word of God claims for him, or he is less than nothing-he is the arch-deceiver of mankind. In trying to remove from the Bible and the person of Jesus everything that could possibly be objected to in the name of man’s science, in trying to bribe off the enemy by those concessions which the enemy most desires, the modernist has abandoned what he set out to defend. Here, as in all of life, those things thought to be hardest to defend, are also the things most worth defending.

Jesus is the Sum

Who is this Jesus as described by God’s word? Jesus claimed himself to be Yahweh, the I AM, who spoke to Moses from the burning bush (cf. Jn. 8:56-58 and Ex. 3:2-6, 13, 14). Jesus was declared to be God, the Expression of Deity who came from eternity (Jn. 1:1-4, 14). The O.T. claimed the eternity and finality of Jesus. The scribes looked to Bethlehem of Judah for the Messiah “for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel . . .” (Matt. 2:5,6). But the Jews did not read the whole text, for the passage in Micah 5:2 goes on to say, “whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting.” The “Biblical Jesus” not only accepted such honor, but demanded to be honored as God (Jn. 5:23). Jesus made no apology for claiming to be Jehovah, the Creator of the Universe, the Origin of all life, the Beginning and the End, with the power of life and death in his word.

To support his claim he raised people from the dead, fed multitudes with a few fragments of food from a child’s lunch, cured the incurable, made whole the helplessly cripple, stilled the wind and the sea, prophesied of the future and it came to pass, and made claims for himself that could only be made by God-or a totally deceived fool.

Man, in his strutting ignorance would lay aside plain evidence to satisfy his own appetite for self-justification. The modernist would have us leave off the scriptures when we consider Christ. But, what testimony is there of the Son of God apart from the record? It is asking the judge to hear a case with no witnesses, evidence, or defense, only the criticism and condemnation of the prosecutor. Our adversary would delight in such an arrangement. He does not wish to meet the Lord in combat, but would rather avoid him by defining him away into obscurity. He would make him a shadowy, unknowable figure who died somewhere in history and whose significance is as demonstrable as Santa Claus or the Tooth fairy.

Historically, Jesus is classed by the modernist alongside “other” religious “symbols” like Muhammed or Confucious, in a non-redemptive role as “great teacher.” But, Jesus was not a “great-teacher” unless he was “The Great Teacher.” Muhammed never claimed to be anything but a “prophet.” Hardly did he claim to be the Son of God, and certainly not the Messiah of all mankind, who alone had the power to forgive sin and grant mercy instead of judgment. The Oriental philosophers (then as well as today) had some unusual and novel views regarding the spirit of man, but none ever claimed to be the “way” of reconciling man to God in justification. The best philosophies that men have been able to compile as to man’s place in time, space, matter, and intellect have yet to find any substance or application for man when it comes to the ultimate question of Life: What happens after death? Only the Christ has given us the answer to that question, and sealed his promise with his own resurrection. “I am the resurrection and the life: He that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die: Believest thou this ” (Jn. 11:25, 26).

This is the question facing all men-it is a question answered “no” by the Modernist. It is a question answered “no” by all who do not “continue in my word” (Jn. 8:31). Where does one go after he has rejected the Son of God and the testimony of the Son? “There remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries . . .It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:27, 31). Jesus is the last word, the “amen” to every promise God has given us. The devil knows this, and will combat that finality till the day he is cast into the pit with all those he has deceived. Beward brethren, “There is salvation in none other name under heaven.”

Truth Magazine XXI: 41, pp. 652-653
October 20, 1977