Truth Magazine

By Johnny Stringer

Some have decided that the worship in most congregations is not sufficiently spiritual, that it is stilted and formal. They seem convinced that the way to solve this problem is for the congregation to change whatever order is followed in the worship. Many of these brethren want to engage in the same scriptural actions, but they want to change the order in which these actions are done. Some, in fact, would even have us destroy whatever order is being followed and replace it with no orderly procedure whatever, thereby creating a disorderly assembly (1 Cor. 14:33, 40).

All must admit that, for too many brethren, worship is merely a formality which they go through-a routine obligation they feel they must fulfill to avoid hell. Their hearts are not involved, their worship is not in spirit (John 4:24) and they receive no spiritual benefit from it. This is sad. But the question is: Is this condition due to the fact that the congregation follows the same orderly procedure? Will changing the order or destroying the order solve the problem?

Certainly, there is no order prescribed by the scriptures which must be followed in performing the scriptural expressions of worship. It surely is wrong for brethren to reach the point that they believe the order they follow is the only way it can be done. There is absolutely nothing wrong with replacing one orderly procedure with another orderly procedure. Sometimes a change in order serves a useful purpose. But those who are crusading for change under the impression that a change in the order of procedure is going to make the worship more spiritually meaningful are laboring under a strong delusion. Their proposed solution betrays shallow and superficial thinking.

If the worship of certain brethren is mere formality, if it is not spiritually meaningful to them, it is not because of the order in which the acts of worship are performed. In those same assemblies which are so dull and formal and meaningless to some brethren, there are other brethren who are deeply involved and greatly blessed-and they are following the same order of procedure that the bored formalists are following! If the worship is but a meaningless formality for a person, that person himself is responsible; he must not try to justify himself by shifting the blame to the fact that the congregation follows a certain established order.

What matters is not what order is followed, but whether or not one’s heart is involved in the worship. A Christian’s heart can be involved regardless of the order. If a Christian meditates upon the spiritual thoughts expressed in the songs, the singing will be meaningful and edifying to him, no matter where they come in the order that is being followed. One can pray just as intensely and sincerely even if the praying has been done immediately after the third song for twenty years. The Christian cannot help but be stirred by meditating upon what the bread and fruit of the vine represent. All who listen intently will be helped by the preaching of God’s word. If a person wants to find the one who is responsible for the fact that the worship is but an unmeaningful formality to him, all he has to do is find a mirror, look in, and behold the culprit!

The solution to cold formalism in worship, brethren, lies not in changing the order of procedure, but in changing the hearts of brethren. The meaningfulness of worship depends upon the hearts of those involved. If they are spiritually minded and their hearts are involved in what they are doing, the worship will be for them a wonderful, beneficial experience; otherwise, it cannot be but a boring formality, unless it is artificially made interesting by gimmicks and constant changes for novelty.

Truth Magazine XXI:17, p. 265
April 28, 1977

By Lewis Willis

Snake Handler Bitten; Dies Without Antidote

DELBARTON, W. VA. (AP)-The snake that bit Curbs Mounts during a church ceremony was a big one. It lest fang marks an inch apart. Mounts’ arm swelled to twice its normal size, but he sought no medical attention before he died three days later.

He was a member of a church which follows a Biblical quotation that says “they shall take up serpents . . .”

Mounts, 61, died at his Slick hock home Wednesday, Coroner Ernie Ritchie said. He was bitten twice on the fight hand Sunday by a water moccasin.

“The right arm was swollen twice the normal size from the hand to the shoulder and was discolored,” Ritchie said.

“Swelling had even entered into the chest area along with discoloration.”

The coroner said the fang marks were an inch apart, almost twice the distance of marks from an average bite.

Modern efforts to duplicate the miraculous feats of apostolic days are legion. It seems that men cannot or will not learn that the day of miracles has passed. The article above appeared in the Amarillo Daily News on April 21, 1976. The religious snake-handling cult of Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia has received much publicity. Much of it has been such as is in this little article. It has caused many people to turn from religion as a “form of superstition” with which intelligent people will have nothing to do. However, as there are quack doctors and dishonest lawyers, there are also false religionists. To dismiss religion because of such misguided actions by some is as foolhardy as dismissing doctors and lawyers because some are without integrity.

The biblical passage used to justify this snake handling practice is Mark 16:17-18. Here Jesus is issuing His final instructions to His Apostles. “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” But, does this passage teach an enduring practice of these miraculous acts? Many say, “Yes.” As proof, they cite the tongue speakers of today. Or, what about the Oral Roberts type who heals the sick? However, those who believe these things have been pressed, and rightfully so, to show evidence of the presence within themselves of these other miraculous acts. The more unlearned (which sounds better than “ignorant”) have taken up the challenge and started playing with poisonous snakes. Periodically, we read that some poor soul has died, as in this article. When I lived in Louisville, Kentucky, more little articles appeared because we were closer to the scene.

Interestingly, I cannot recall a single time when one of the preachers for these people was bitten. Only their disciples. Don’t ever call preachers “stupid!” If anyone knows the folly of such teaching, the preachers do! And, they are not about to get caught by a water moccasin with a one-inch fang span. Do you think they are crazy? Like a fox! But they seem to have no compulsions of conscience concerning their brethren.

These actions were “signs.” Such evidences were necessary in the dawn of Christianity to attract attention to the doctrine. They were to authenticate the message and the messengers. As in Christ’s personal ministry spiritual authority was indicated by miraculous works, so was it in the ministry of His Apostles and followers. But, our Lord’s words do not mean that they were to be in perpetuity, as a continually recurring evidence of the truth of Christianity. These things were to persuade the unbeliever (1 Cor. 14:22). God confirmed the word of the Apostles. A thing only needs confirmation once! In taking up serpents and drinking deadly things, their lives were preserved by the miraculous power of God, whenever the exertion of such power was needed. What was in itself injurious, was made serviceable to the interests of God’s Kingdom. However, the extension of this statement to believers generally, in every age of the church, is not warranted by anything in the text, and such introduces confusion of the sort of our little newspaper article. The promise of Christ was a promise to the Apostles and to the apostolic age. Fulfillment of the promise is all that is demanded by reasonable and responsible men of our age.

Was the promise fulfilled? Yes! Paul cast out a devil at Philippi (Acts 16:16-18). The Apostles spoke in other tongues on Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4). Paul was bitten by a venomous serpent at Melita , without harm coming to him (Acts 28:4-6). The sick were healed (Acts 3:6-7). The only act not directly confirmed is the drinking of a “deadly thing.” McGarvey and Pendleton wrote: “The book of Acts gives examples of each one of these signs except the fourth, and though we have no record of a disciple escaping the effects of drinking poison, there is little doubt that in the many persecutions such cases did occur” (The Fourfold Gospel, p. 764). How many times must a promise be fulfilled before we acknowledge that the matter is concluded?

Yet, men like the snake handler affirm its continuing fulfillment. He who affirms that the signs to yet follow the believers should present some ocular demonstration of the fact before he asks the people to believe his assertion. Let us see them, and then we will believe. Dying from a snake bite does anything but confirm that such continues today. After all, a rank infidel might die from an untreated snake bite.

Just exactly when these powers were withdrawn, perhaps we cannot finally decide, i.e., we are unable to give the hour, date, place or person. But, as the purpose of their bestowal was temporary, it is evident that when that purpose was satisfied, and Christianity was launched upon the waters of the world, it was in accordance with divine wisdom that miracles should cease. The Apostle Paul affirmed as much (1 Cor. 13:8).

As for me, do not waste your time inviting me to a snake handling service. I would be like that fellow who took his wife to such a service. He was asked if he wanted to “try his faith” by taking up a big rattlesnake. He turned to his wife and asked, “Where is the back door?” She replied, “They don’t have one.” To which he replied, “I wonder where they would like to have one.” Nuff said!

Truth Magazine XXI: 17, pp. 264-265
April 28, 1977

By Robert Jackson

Thus far in our study, we have noticed that departure has been caused as a lack of respect for the authority of Jesus Christ, failing to abide by the doctrine of Christ; a misunderstanding of the difference between the church and a church-the church in the universal sense which is composed of all of God’s people, and a local church under the local arrangement that God authorized in His word. Then we studied how the men of God had warned about departure that would come into their midst because some men would set themselves up to be as God, taking the place of God by giving commandments and people bowing down to them and that they would draw away disciples after them. We noticed as a result of this that we hail one man that eventually claimed to be the universal bishop, taking the oversight of all the churches, violating the very principle which God laid down in His word that elders are to oversee the flock of God which is among diem in 1 Peter 5:1-3. As a result of this, we had Catholicism to have its origin and then out of that came protests, trying to reform the Catholic view-Martin Luther and others-and as a result of that, Protestant Denominationalism.

We have found the results of division that started a long time ago by ~brethrenfdeparting;from the faith resulted in Catholicism and Denominationalism, but then we find men of God went across the country begging and pleading with men and women to go back to the Bible and speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where the Bible is silent, establishing churches of Christ across this country. But, to and behold, after we got churches planted again, we find that brethren started making their departure again from the plan of God.

In order that we might understand this, let us get before us now the primary work of the local church, the things that God has authorized the local church to engage in and to use its money for. First of all, I find in the teaching of God’s word that the church is authorized to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, the business of preaching the gospel of Christ has the preeminence over all other things because only by the gospel of Christ, the power of God, will souls be able to be saved. In Romans 1:16, Paul said, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation.” And so then the local church has the God-given right and the responsibility of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, supporting the sending out of the word of God. This one cannot question.

Then secondly, the church has the right to gather together to worship-to teach, to edify and build up the members of the body of Christ. We find that since God’s people are come together for worship there must be a place for them to come together. Whether they rent a place, build a place, or meet out under the tree, they must come together to worship God. The church has the right to teach its own members, as the Bible says in Acts 20:28, to “feed the flock of God which is among you.” So then we find that the church has the God-given right to preach the gospel, and secondly to teach its own members and to engage in worshipping God Almighty.

Then thirdly, we need to understand that the church has the responsibility of providing for its own when they are in need. This we find in the teaching of the word of God in Acts 6 and many other places. As we will bring out in our studies, certainly the local church is all-sufficient to take care of its own needs, and therefore they are able to help relieve the needs of others, as we will also point out in our studies.

But then after these churches of Christ started doing the work that God intended for them to do, to and behold, some men decided that they had come up with a very brilliant idea. They had decided in their own minds that some of the local churches out here were very small and therefore, they really could not get the work done like they should. So they decided that what we need is some kind of organization that could bring churches of Christ together in supporting the preaching of the word of God and in taking care of the benevolent cases. So all these would then be able to join together and pool their resources in some manner so they could be able to do more. They talked about “what a good work” this would be, and how much “good” could be done. Thus, in 1849, in Cincinnatti, Ohio, there was born and established the United Christian Missionary Society.

Now the United Christian Missionary Society was an organization, a human organization. The reason I say “human” is because it is not divine. You can not read in the pages of God’s word how to build, establish, maintain, support or give contributions to a society, a missionary society. It is just not in the divine revelation, so a missionary society like the United Christian Missionary Society is strictly a human institution, a human organization-or brought up and designed and planned and schemed by the wisdom of men.

So, in 1849, in Cincinnatti, Ohio, they established the United Christian Missionary Society. It was established by a board of directors. The Missionary Society then said, “You send us a delegate, along with about a 9610.00 contribution, and then the missionary society will send out preachers, preaching the word of God.” But keep this in mind (which a lot of people fail to understand): the United Christian Missionary Society was not only set up to preach the gospel of Christ, but also to build benevolent societies to take care of the poor, and to build colleges, etc. So then, here is a great big organization without any divine authority, built and established by human wisdom and tacked on to the churches of Christ. Churches of Christ could send their money to this institution, and this institution would send out preachers. As a result of it, the United Christian Missionary Society controlled the churches. You have got the churches of Christ operating under a Board of Directors, under a missionary society, which gives it the universal concept of the church.

Soon some of the men started saying that this thing is just not right. Men like Bro. David Lipscomb, Bro.Srygley, and others stood up and said, “No. The churches of Christ do not have the right to ~ support the missionary society-there is no Bible authority for it!” Men like Bro. Lipscomb and Bro. Srygley challenged these men who were supporting the missionary society to give book, chapter and verse for such an institution. Of course they could not find it. It is not in the word of God. And if they could have found it, all they would have had to do was simply say, “Here it is”-but they could not find it. So when they could not answer men like Lipscomb and others, what alternative did they have? Either to close the thing down or to keep it going and determine to answer their questions with some kind of human philosophy. And here is what they came up with. They said, “Well, look at the good that it does!” “After all, the end justifies the means!” “If it does a lot of good, and the Lord said to do good, and the missionary society does a lot of good, so it has a right to exist.” Men like Bro. Lipscomb and others said, “No, the end does not justify the means, there must be Bible authority for it.” My friend, there was no Bible authority for it, and these men kept pressing the same issue. Finally the people who endorsed the missionary society said men like Bro. Lipscomb, Bro. Srygley, etc. are “anti-missionary-they do not believe in sending out preachers,” and they started calling them “antis.”

Of course that was wrong. Men like Bro. Lipscomb and others believed in preaching the gospel of Christ. They believed in local churches having preachers. They believed in local churches sending out men of God to preach the word of God. They believed in congregations supporting a man away from the field. But these people, in order to get away from them, said, “They are antis,” and that sounded bad! You know what happened? Division started coming again, and it came as a result of a lack of respect for the authority of Christ. It came as a result of men determining to tack on their human inventions upon the church; and therefore this split and divided the body of Christ.

But now stop for just a moment and think with me. Do you think it stopped the missionary society? Here is a lesson that we need to learn and ought never to forget: once you open the gate for something without Bible authority, you cannot close that gate. Something else surely is going to follow. Some of the people who were in favor of the missionary society went right along with the idea that we ought not to have instruments of music in the worship, but now watch what happened. They said, “Well, we have got the society without any Bible authority and after all the Bible does not say ‘Thou shall not have instrumental music.’ The Bible does not say, ‘Thou shall not use it.”‘ So then some of the people began to say, “My, it sounds good,” and “I just like it and I think we ought to have it.”

Do you know that after 1849 when the Missionary Society was established, do you know the next thing that came in was instrumental music. And then do you understand, my friend, that that brought division within the ranks of the body of Christ? Do you not see that they divided the church first over the organization, and then after they had perverted the organization, we find that the worship of God was perverted? Men of God stood up and opposed this, and said that we ought not to use instruments of music in the worship. What did they say? Did they give Bible authority for instrumental music? Did they say here is the book, chapter and verse? Did they say, “We speak where the Bible speaks and we are silent where the Bible is silent-and we will give you the authority for the use of instruments?” No, they just said, “You folks are anti-music, you don’t believe in having music.” That was not the issue. We believe in having music, but not instrumental music. We believe in having the kind of music that God authorized: singing, making melody in the heart (Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16).

But what had happened to brethren? They had already caused division over the organization of the missionary society and then perverted the worship. Then what happened? Well, you read a lot about “Christian Churches,” and you see a lot about “Disciples of Christ” buildings. I will tell you how they got here. They got here as a result of a departure of brethren leaving the faith of God. And I will tell you what you can do, my friend. You can drive by some of the buildings where they have got signs “Christian Church,” look down on the cornerstone, and it will say “Church of Christ.” Do you know why the name was changed? The same reason they changed the organization! The same reason they changed the worship! They perverted the name! The church does not belong to Christians, the church belongs to the Lord.

But then again we have another departure, a complete departure in the body of Christ, and thus we have division within our ranks again. Why? Over a lack of respect for Bible authority, over perverting the organization of the church, over perverting the work of the church and therefore perverting the worship of the church. Brethren, these are the things that have divided us, and that is the reason we are in the divided condition that we are today. There is a difference between the Christian Church and the body of Jesus Christ.

Truth Magazine XXI: 17, pp. 262-263
April 28, 1977

By Irvin Himmel

Several years ago a family moved into a certain metropolitan area and began worshiping with one of several congregations in that city. In a short while they were invited into the homes of three or four different families. They stated later that not one of these families had invited them simply because they were Christians, nor because they were newcomers, but in each case because the people were trying to sell them a particular line of products.

No valid objection can be raised to Christians making their livelihood (or supplementing their income) by selling legitimate and useful merchandise. No one objects to Christians selling products to other Christians. But something needs to be said about a growing practice that is extremely distasteful. And we have heard of some preachers and elders who are chief offenders in this matter.

If someone is invited into a home for dinner or for what he expects to be a purely social visit and then the host tries to interest his guest in buying some product, the guest goes away feeling that he was deceived. What he thought was intended as an act of hospitality turned out to be primarily a sales pitch. Many persons are completely disgusted with this commercialized form of hospitality.

In some congregations the members who sell certain products have shown a tendency to be sociable only toward others who sell or purchase their line of merchandise. A clique is formed that excludes those Christians who do not wish to buy their goods. And so many have been invited into homes only to be confronted with a sales pitch that they now ask when invited to have dinner with a fellow Christian, “What are you selling?”

Most local churches will include several individuals who sell items in their homes, and people have every right to do that. If someone wants to invite other Christians to come to sales meetings and sales parties, that is his lawful right. If one wishes to invite others to his home to demonstrate a product or show a line of wares, that is fine, and if he wishes to give them a free dinner while they are there, that is his business. But let us not resort to unethical or harmful practices to increase our income.

The Bible says, “Use hospitality one to another without grudging” (1 Pet. 4:9). This passage does not teach us to use hospitality as a front for promoting our personal business interests. When someone is invited to be another’s guest to be a potential customer, he ought to be told plainly what the purpose behind the invitation is to avoid any appearance of deceit and to prevent hard feelings.

Perhaps some Christians have not stopped to realize how their sales tactics appear in the minds of others. All of us appreciate genuine and warm hospitality. Probably many of us could show much more friendship toward other Christians than we generally show. And we are aware of how hard it is for most families to have sufficient income to keep up with inflation. But commercialized hospitality breeds resentment and disfavor.

Truth Magazine XXI: 17, pp.261-262
April 28, 1977