Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

For the last two years, controversy has filled the issues of this periodical regarding ,a new heresy, one which has been variously called the new unity cult, the grace-unity heresy, etc. Those of you who do not take many of the periodicals might not know just how widespread this heresy has gone. Since I have been editing Truth Magazine and been receiving the magazines with which we exchange papers, I have been appalled at the number of magazines advocating the grace-unity heresy. Here is a partial list of those papers: Mission, Restoration Review, Integrity, The Ensign Fair, Outreach, and the Firm Foundation. I know that there must be some papers teaching this doctrine which I have inadvertently overlooked.

Because some of our readers did not like the way in which the recent controversy was handled, they dropped their subscriptions and have acted as if the issues were merely personality clashes which had been escalated into brotherhood issues. My brethren, I do not ask that you agree with how we have handled this controversy; I only ask that you wake up to the fact that another apostasy is in progress. The issues at stake in this controversy are greater than those at stake in the institutional and sponsoring church controversies. Whereas those controversies denied one aspect of the work and organization of the church, this one concerns itself with the very foundation on which the church is built-its basis of authority.

Recently, some among us have written articles in which they speak very critically of the restoration principle. Here is how one author spoke of it:

“But I have become alarmed at the tendency of many brethren to begin using what is known as the `restoration principle’ in a creedal sort of way. One influential brother wrote a while back that `Churches of Christ will live or die, prosper or decline, in accordance with what they think and do about the restoration principle: Well  isn’t it our good fortune that someone has finally identified the one principle that will determine the fate of sincere Christians across the land! How ignorantly we had heretofore thought that the important thing was how people responded to the gospel. What a pity that those Christians across the globe who have never heard of a restoration ‘principle’ or ‘movement’ do not have access to this vital pronouncement; those poor saints will just have to settle for the New Testament.”

This good brother, who, by the way, is one of my personal friends, either does not understand what we mean when we speak of the “restoration principle” or does not stand where we stand. My friend, express it how you may, what is meant by the term “restoration principle” is the very basis of authority for the New Testament church.

Reformation, Revelation or Restoration?

So far as I know, there have only been three concepts of authority ever posited for the church. They are the three mentioned in our heading: reformation, revelation and restoration. Let us look at these three:

1. Revelation. The doctrine of continuous revelation maintains that one cannot have the New Testament church unless the miraculous gifts and continuous revelation are restored in the church today. The final appeal for authority in such a movement is not the New Testament but the modern day revelations. Such persons as Ellen G. White, Joseph Smith, Jr., Mary Baker Eddy, etc. are people who believe in continuous revelation. Those who have been involved in the charismatic movement are a part of the group which believes in continuous revelation.

2. Reformation. This principle states that we need not and cannot go back to the primitive church of the first century. Where an apostate church exists today, the members have an obligation to reform it. There is no need to restore the New Testament church, one only needs to reform the existing churches. Of course, to reform an apostate church, one would have to go back to the New Testament to learn what must be wrong with the apostate church and how it can be reformed. Hence, this principle is inseparably connected with the restoration principle.

3. Restoration. The restoration principle maintains that we must plant the first century truth in today’s world in order to establish New Testament churches. It is based on the affirmations that the Bible is the full and final revelation of God to man on earth and that to the extent men have departed from the New Testament church to this extent they need to go back to the New Testament to find and restore that which has been laid aside by the traditions of men.

The restoration principle asserts that the Bible is a blueprint or pattern which must be followed by men of all ages. Men have not been left to pick and choose exactly what they will believe and practice in the church today. Rather, God has forever settled such matters and revealed them to men in the Bible. The “restoration principle” is a twentieth century term which completely expresses a biblical idea, namely, that men must have authority for everything they believe and practice. Those who are speaking very critically of the “restoration principle” either do not understand what it is saying or do not agree with the biblical principle which underlies it.

The restoration principle is not the gospel. However, the restoration principle says that we cannot know what the gospel is unless we go to the text of the New Testament. No one can prove what the gospel is without proof texts. When men preach a different gospel, which in reality is another gospel (Gal. 1:6-9), they have apostasized. The only scriptural theological method is to go back to the New Testament to learn what the gospel is.Is The Restoration Principle Biblical?

The very idea of the New Testament gospel of Jesus Christ being a convenant insists that it is a blueprint or pattern which must be followed in all ages. The Bible calls the New Testament revelation a “covenant” (Heb. 8:6-13; 9:15-17; 12:24; 13:20). A convenant is a binding agreement between two parties; once the covenant has been fixed, it cannot be altered or tampered with in any way. Paul said, “Brethren, I speak after the manner of men: though it be but a man’s covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one maketh it void, or addeth thereto” (Gal. 3:15). Hence, God’s revelation is fixed forever. It cannot be changed to fit each existing period .of history; He has one pattern for all time.

The job of revealing this covenant to man was that of the apostles and prophets. They could teach only “whatsoever I (Jesus) have commanded you” (Mt. 28:20). Hence, the early church was required to continue steadfastly in the “apostles doctrine” (Acts 2:42). What these apostles revealed was to be handed down from one generation to another (2 Thess. 2:15; 2 Tim. 2:2). God’s pattern was fixed and final for all men of all time.

Every commandment in the New Testament which forbids apostasy or warns against false doctrine presupposes that there is a blueprint or pattern which every Christian is expected to follow. There could be no warnings about falling away from the truth unless the truth was fixed forever. All of these verses, therefore, assure us that there is a pattern or blueprint which must be followed: 2 Jn. 9-11; Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Cor. 4:6; Rom. 16:17-18; etc.

These and a number of other principles learned from the scriptures force me to the conclusion that the authority for the church is fixed forever and final. James Alexander Haldane, once said, “If we carefully observe the express precepts delivered in the New Testament, the practices of the churches mentioned with approbation, and what is said respecting the abuses which so early crept in, through slight of men and cunning craftiness, whereby they lay in wait to deceive, we shall find a complete system, calculated to answer every purpose which Jesus had in view in the institution of churches” (A View of the Social Worship and Ordinances Observed By the First Christians, p. 52). This, my dear friends, is what is meant by the “restoration principle.”

Deniers of the Restoration Principle

I have before me a number of quotations from men who deny the validity of the restoration principle. Each of them are ultimately left without a chart or compass as they pass through the sea of life. They have abandoned the authority of the New Testament and have nothing left to use to determine what is right and what is wrong.

Some among us are either upset with the terminology or the principle of restoration. If it is the terminology, let them suggest something which is superior which does not have the same kinds of objectionable features in it. If it is the principle to which they object, let them come right out and say what principle of authority they recognize. I defy one to sustain a biblical principle without using restoration theology. When such a person sets out to prove that the restoration principle is wrong, he no doubt will appeal to the Bible. What he is in essence doing is trying to restore something he feels is lost from Bible. Hence, he would be using the restoration principle to prove that the restoration principle is wrong. I greater inconsistency I cannot imagine.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I would like to quote some of the they hear the word used. But John uses the term to statements from Alexander Campbell as he described carry the thought of a deep and mutual sharing what is intended by the restoration principle:

“A restoration of the ancient order of things is all that is necessary to the happiness and usefulness of Christians. No attempt ‘to reform the doctrine, discipline and government of the church,’ (a phrase too long in use,) can promise a better result than those which have been attempted and languished to death. We are glad to see, in the above extract, that the thing proposed, is to bring the Christianity and the church of the present day up to the standard of the New Testament. This is in substance, though in other terms,. what we contend for. To bring the societies of Christians up to the New Testament, is just to bring the disciples individually and collectively, to walk in the faith, and in the commandments of the Lord and Savior, as presented in that blessed volume; and this is to restore the ancient order of things (The Christian Baptist, “A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things, No. 1,” p. 128).

“When we have found ourselves out of the way we may seek for the ancient paths, but we are not at liberty to invent path for our own feet. We should return to the Lord.

“But a restoration of the ancient order of things, it appears, is all that is contemplated by the wise disciples of the Lord; as it is agreed that this is all that is wanting to the perfection, happiness, and glory of the Christian community. To contribute to this is our most ardent desire — our daily and diligent inquire and pursuit. Now, in attempting to accomplish this, it must be observed, that it belongs to every individual and to every congregation of individuals to discard from their faith and their practice every thing that is not found written in the New Testament of the Lord and Savior, and to believe and practice whatever is there enjoined. This done, and every thing is done which ought to be done” (Ibid., “A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things, No. 2,” page 133).

This, my friends is what is meant by the “restoration principle.”

Truth Magazine XXI: 22, pp. 339-341
June 2, 1977

By Larry Ray Hafley

Premillennialism, the doctrine which says Christ will return to Jerusalem, restore the Jews and rule on a material throne for 1,000 calender years, pervades all segments and sections of sectarianism and parades under the flag of fundamentalism. Its incipient influence is seen everywhere. In this, it is analogous to the theory of evolution. A scientist, who otherwise reasons fairly and factually, often has his information besmirched by his evolutionary interpretations. So it is with premillennial preconceptions. A Baptist preacher recently wrote an article in defense of the inspiration of the Bible. His theme cited fulfilled prophecy as one line of evidence for inspiration. However, his premillennial persuasion led him into Scripture perversion. As an example thereof, please note the following quote.

“Many, many years ago Moses prophesied: `And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth to the other; and there shalt thou serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.’ Deut. 28:64.

“Years later Ezekiel restated the reason for the scattering (ch. 36:19). No one questions the fact that the Jews were scattered among the nations of the world. But now comes the amazing thing that has happened in our day. He also prophesied that Israel would return to their own land, Ezek. 36:2638. The 37th chapter of Ezekiel relates the vision of the resurrection of dry bones in the valley. This vision he explains (vs. 11-12) ‘. . . these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold they say, `Our bones are dried, our hope is lost: we are cut off from our part . . . I will open your graves and cause you to come out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.’

“On May 14, 1948 the Nation of Israel was revived after 2500 years of dispersion. Can any say that it was not the hand of the Lord? Can any deny the prophecy?” (L.D. Capell, “IS THE BIBLE REALLY INSPIRED,” Missionary Baptist Searchlight, May 10, 1976).

The Scattering And Gathering

God indeed scattered His people for their sins. God in truth promised to gather His elect from their captivity. Has the fulfillment of this prophecy “happened in our day,” namely, “On May 14, 1948?” “Yes,” says our premillennial Baptist. This view overlooks a variety of things.

First, and foremost, the fulfillment of the pledge to gather Israel from among the nations occurred, “not in our day,” but in the days of Ezra. In fact, Nehemiah cited the threats of the book of Deuteronomy in his prayer for rebuilding (Neh. 1:8, 9). See Jer. 25:11-13; 2 Chron. 36:1723; Ezra 1:1-4.

Second, the king of Babylon and the land of the Chaldeans were to be punished “for their iniquity.” If the restoration of Israel occurred on May 14, 1948, when did the banishment of Babylon transpire? The land of the Chaldeans was not to be consumed until the restoration of Israel. But if the restoration of Israel was not accomplished until 1948, how could God fulfill His vengeance against the king of Babylon? Must Babylon and the Chaldeans be restored from the dust of antiquity so God can back up and hitch on to his threat to desolate them?

Third, the recovery and reformation of Israel was contingent upon their obedience (Dent. 4:29-31; Neh. 1:8, 9). “If thou shalt hearken …. and if thou turn unto the Lord thy God with all thy heart,” “then the Lord thy God will return thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee” (Dent. 30:1-10). The 37th chapter of Ezekiel, if verses 11 and 12 were fulfilled in May, 1948, requires that Israel not only be returned “unto your own land,” but that they then hate their sins and begin to serve God faithfully and fruitfully (Ezek. 37:24-31). Has this characterized “The Nation of Israel” which was formed in 1948? No, a thousand times, no. A destroyed nation, such as Israel was, before it could be restored, had to repent and return. “At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them” (Jer. 18:7, 8). Does that describe “the Nation of Israel,” 1948 vintage? No; therefore, the 1948 Israeli nation cannot be the nation resurrected and restored by the hand of the Lord. Further, is “the Nation of Israel,” begun in 1948, characterized by “a new heart?” Does that 1948 nation “walk” in God’s “statutes” and keep His “judgments?” Does that nation “remember (their) own evil ways and (their) doings that were not good?” Do they loathe themselves in their “own sight” because of their former “iniquities” and “abominations?” No, they do not. But that was to typify and identify the Israel restored and returned by Jehovah (Ezek. 37:24-31). Therefore, “the Nation of Israel” of 1948 is not the fulfillment of the restoration prophecies.

Conclusion

A multitude of other issues could be used to strengthen and bolster our present proposition. This will suffice to show that a false theory, like a drop of poison in a glass of water, can mar what is essentially the truth on other topics. Fulfilled prophecy testifies to the inspiration of Scripture. No one denies that. But premillennial propaganda blunts the effect of the truth.

Truth Magazine XXI: 22, p. 338
June 2, 1977

By Philip S. North

Oddly enough, these two words do no mean the same exact thing. Actually, they go from one extreme to the other. When we talk about someone that is “different,” we think of the individual who is not one to merely “follow the crowd.” We look upon that person as an individualist;. not like other people; offset from the majority; opposite of same; and to a certain degree, independent. A person who is different certainly and most always attracts attention. In some cases, especially with reference to being a true, faithful, and devout Christian, being different is not bad.

An individual that is “indifferent” is usually categorized as being contrary; stubborn; disobedient; delinquent; not reacting to; unconcerned. This is often said of an outlaw, troublemaker, or a contrary son or daughter (a problem child). This person, though he may be classified as different in his manner of living, his life is at the same time indifferent with regard to law and order and respect to authority. Most people may obey the law, while he chooses not to. This is an example of being indifferent. Thus, here is our conclusion. A person that is different will stay away from those things of the world that are sinful and from people who choose to follow such. While one that is indifferent will be wayward to those who have selected to follow as their pattern of life that which is right and good in the eyes of the Almighty God. Now let us examine our lives and see just where we fit in. Are we of a different nature or of an indifferent nature? We are doubtless going to be one or the other.

Are We Different?

When we decide to put off the old man of sin and put on the new (Rom. 6:6; Eph. 4:22-23; Col. 3:9,10), we should also resolve ourselves to be different — that is to say, no longer a partaker of the lusts of the world and its sensuous pleasures (Rom. 12:2). Paul teaches us that we must live in the world, but not be of the world (Titus 2:12). King Solomon teaches us all throughout the book of Ecclesiastes that man is going to have to live under the sun. However, he went on to conclude that the whole duty of man is to “fear God and keep his commandments” (Eccl. 12:13). Christians are a group of people that are looked upon by the world as being strange; unusual; weird, if you please; odd. Paul calls us “a peculiar people” (Titus 2:14). That is why it should not constantly bother us, if even at all, when you hear some worldly individual call you “square,” “sissy,” “redneck,” “sweety,” “Mr. Nice Guy,” “party pooper,” “stick-in-the-mud,” or whatever!! As long as somebody thinks one or more of the above about us, we must be alright, provided we are not hypocrites concerning the way we act around people. WOE INDEED TO THE MAN THAT EVERYBODY SPEAKS GOOD OF! Just how different should we as Christians be?

Do we refuse that alcoholic drink that is offered? Do we refuse to take and pedal dope? What about the use of profanity of ANY kind? Do we stay away from evil companions? Do we engage in premarital sex? What about gambling, cheating people, lying, stealing, obeying the law of our land, etc.? Or better still, what about taking the Bible in its entirety and therefore refusing to add to or take away from that inspired Word? Do we follow the Bible and obey exactly what it dictates and all of what it dictates? These are but a few of the things that the world beseeches us to do in our everyday life-or else beseeches us not to do. Jesus states that “ye are the salt of the earth” (Mt. 5:13). This means that we are to make use of our name “Christian” and be an especially good example for others, that they may see Jesus in our lives. God never intended for anyone to be “good for nothing” and hence do no more in this world than “take up space.” In Matthew 5:16 Jesus teaches us, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” Gentle reader, I ask you this question in the name of your precious soul’s eternal destiny: Are you different? Are you “set apart” from the world?

Are We Indifferent?

Now friend, with reference to the Word of God, this is just what you should not want to be. Just look at the number of moon craters we could fill with people that are indifferent! First of all, they do the exact opposite that the civil law requires and also which God commands. (NOTE: we must obey civil law only as long as it does not conflict with the law of God). These people are just as contrary and as wayward as they know how to be! Next, some people with regard to following the scriptures, will look point blank, bulls eye, at the Bible and argue, pervert, and twist the scriptures around, until after awhile, they have you believing (if you are not on your p’s and q’s) that the sky is naturally pink, black is white, and manual labor is really the name of a Mexican worker. These people will argue with a billboard standing right in their very presence. There are many verses in the Bible that are not at all hard to understand, therefore they mean what they say. I speak of self-explanatory verses. Jesus said in John 8:32, “And ye shall know the truth and truth shall make you free.” In Jn. 8:24 Jesus also told us, “Except ye believe that I am He, ye shall die in your sins.” The Hebrew writer PLAINLY tells us in Hebrews 10:25 not to forsake “the assembling of ourselves together . . . .” Again, Romans 12:2 tells us not to be “conformed to this world . . .” 2 Peter 1:5 tells us to add to our faith virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, brotherly kindness, and love. 2 Timothy 2:15 and James 1:21 tell us to study our Bibles. The list is almost endless about “direct commandments.” The young man Stephen called the Jews in Acts 7:51, “stiffnecked and dncircumcised.” This certainly is an example of being indifferent. Those Jews had their heads bent on rejecting Jesus, and therefore refused to mend their ways to God’s will.

Many members of the church are indifferent in their attitude of faith-church attendance. You cannot, even with a wire brush and an act of Congress, get them to attend more than just one service a week. “Sunday morning onlys” is what I speak of. They are good bench warmqis, but they can never be good heart warmers. These persistent “Sunday morning onlys” seldom or never ask anybody to attend the services with them, if there is a man in the family, he will not in any way

attend the business meetings, you can never persuade them to read the scripture or word a prayer (even if they may possess the talent to do so), and the other members seldom or never see Christ in their lives. These indifferent people persist on living the kind of life that they wish to live, and rain on anyone that shows concern for their souls.

How is with you, friend? When it comes to obeying the gospel and being faithful to God until death, are you different or indifferent? As long as you live and breathe God’s air upon this big earth, remember that there is one little, simple word in your life that you show every day you exist. This one little word will work either way or the other for you on the day of judgment. It is a word that will send your soul to either Heaven or Hell-attitude!! Let us live every day for Jesus only-as if it were our last. One day it will be. I pray that we always strive for the truth and once we learn what God commands of us, we obey Him without question or hesitancy. Are you different or indifferent?

Truth Magazine XXI: 21, pp. 333-334
May 26, 1977

By Ron Halbrook

For the Truth’s sake, we must learn to avoid hypocrisy in all forms. God condemns it repeatedly. Preachers and teachers of the Word can be as guilty as anyone else. Jesus told the Jews, “All therefore whatsoever (the Pharisees) bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not” (Matt. 23:3). Paul asked, “Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?” (Rom. 2:21) When Jesus said, “Judge not, that ye be not judged,” he referred to hypocritical judgment (Matt. 7:1-5). We must “judge righteous judgment,” not condemning what we allow or allowing what we condemn for the sake of man’s favor (Jn. 7:24).

Hypocrisy comes in many forms. (1) Men often try to appear “better” than they are. Men “join the church” of their choice, because the community “expects” it, without ever examining the Bible to see what God’s choice is! (Matt. 7:15-27). Meeting community standards in religion, while disobeying God’s Word, is hypocrisy. Community approval is _the only “reward” for such religion, for God rejects it (Matt. 6:lff).

(2) Men often try to appear “worse” than they are. Peter tried to blend in with unbelievers, by denying the Lord. When the Lord “looked upon Peter,” he “went out, and wept bitterly” (Lk.11:54ff). Some Christians today need that same repentance: “let your laughter be turned into mourning” (Jas. 4:9). To laugh with our friends at immoral jokes, to have a “social” drink with them, to smoke with them, and to use their cursing, is to destroy our influence by hypocrisy! God’s children are to be “without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world; holding forth the word of life” (Phil. 2:15f).

(3) Men often claim sincerity in religion, but refuse discussion, examination, and debate. A child who works math problems but refuses to have his work discussed or examined, is NOT a sincere student. Jesus freely debated and discussed his doctrine in public, as did his Apostles. There was a time when Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, and others would submit their doctrine to public debate “for the truth’s sake.” Now they generally refuse to debate such things as sprinkling for baptism, the purpose of Bible baptism, their creeds, instrumental music in worship, human organizations, etc.

(4) The sacramental system encourages hypocrisy. Some men teach that God “infuses grace into the soul” of one who partakes of the “sacraments” (certain religious acts). Unwittingly, this encourages people to think they can sin to their heart’s desire and then “make it all right” by use of the “sacrament.” Human sacraments are worthless to begin with, and only obedience “from the heart” to God’s Word cleanses from sin (Rom. 6). (5) Modernism IS hypocrisy personified. Modernists claim to honor Christ while saying he was “wrong” on certain things, and to honor the Bible as God’s Word while saying it contains contradictions and falsehoods (cf Heb. 4:15; 2 Tim. 2:16f). This is bald-faced religious hypocrisy, as practiced by Judas when he gave Christ the kiss, of death. Let us examine ourselves, that faith may work by love (Gal. 5:6).

Truth Magazine XXI: 21, pp. 332-333
May 26, 1977