Truth Magazine

By Keith Sharp

One of the pleasant memories of my childhood is of an old, brown, jack mule that Roy Payne, a close friend of my family, used to harness to the plow. The mule’s name was “Old Nigger” (no offense intended, that was simply his name). “Old Nigger” died a few years ago at the approximate age of forty years, a very “ripe old age” for a mule. He spent practically his entire life in the harness. “Nigger” was easy to work and would rarely offer harm to any human. In short, “Old Nigger” was meek.

The word “meek” was used in our Lord’s time to describe the temper of an animal broken to the harness-an ox broken to the yoke.”1 Who are the “meek?” How do they “inherit the earth?” Why do they do so? Vine thus describes “meekness”:

. . . the exercises of it are first and chiefly towards God. It is that temper of spirit in which we accept his dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting; it is closely linked with the word . . . (humility), and follows directly upon it. . . . It is only the humble heart which is also the meek, and which, as such, does not fight against God and more or less struggle and contend with Him. This meekness, however, being first of all a meekness before God, is also such in the face of men, even of evil men. . . .” 2

Vine identifies three characteristics of “meekness,” which we shall examine in order.

First, he indicates the relationship of “meekness” to “humility.” These terms are not synonymous. Rather, humility will cause one to be meek. If we have humility, we will be led to both obey God and properly treat our fellow men (Phil. 2:1-8), and these are two major components of meekness.

Meekness is first demonstrated in our relationship to God. “The meek man is one broken to God’s harness, one not motivated by the carnal mind but uniformly controlled and directed by `the mind of the Spirit’ (Romans 8:1-11).”3 When people stubbornly refuse to submit themselves to the law of God, they are not meek, no matter how much they may appear to be so.

But, meekness will also manifest itself in our relationship to other people. The meek are “not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom. 12:16-21; cf. Matt. 11:29; 1 Pet. 2:19-24).

But, there is another manifestation of meekness, one which Vine fails to notice, which is essential to our understanding of the third Beatitude. When most people speak of a meek person, they mean one who is a spineless, “casper and milk toast” type. But the basic element of meekness, in relation to one’s own character, is

“equilibrium-the full and complete possession of one’s being, an inner mastery. It has been illustrated in some lexical definitions as the captain at the helm of his ship in the midst of the storm, who, in full control of the vessel, guides the ship steadily through the storm. It is said of Moses in Numbers 12:3, `Now the man Moses was very meek, above all men which were upon the face of the earth,’ yet he was among all men the most courageous, and with Joshua as his colleague and commander in-chief, the greatest fighter in Israel.”4

What greater example could there be of “complete possession of one’s being” than Moses standing before the panicked multitudes of Israel, caught between the murky depths of the Red Sea and the fearful vengeance of Pharaoh, yet calmly commanding, “Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will show you today” (Exod. 14:13). What greater monument to equilibrium than Moses’ leadership of three million backsliding, complaining, rebellious Jews for forty years in a terrible wilderness, and yet only losing control of his temper twice?

The basis, then, of meekness is humility. Three words in three relationships sum up meekness: submission toward God, gentleness toward men and equilibrium toward oneself.

The philosophy of this world has always been and continues to be, “Might makes right.” The ungodly and cruel seem to “get ahead” on this earth. Even an Alexander the Great, who could never master himself, could enjoy every luxury this world has to offer.

Had Jesus declared, “The meek shall inherit Heaven,” this would have posed no problem. But, the paradox lies in the fact that “the meek shall inherit the earth.” How do the meek inherit the earth? “The word ‘inherit’ means literally “to receive by lot . . . receive as one’s own”5 or “receive as an inheritance.”6

“But as the Israelites after taking possession of the land were harassed almost perpetually by their hostile neighbors, and even driven out of the country for a considerable period, it came to pass that the phrase was transferred to denote the tranquil and stable possession of the holy land crowned with all divine blessings….”7

Thus, the term came to denote, not simply to possess something, but to truly enjoy it to the fullest. Is this a promise of a physical kingdom to be established upon this earth some time in the future, in which God’s people will have permanent physical possessions on this earth? Assuredly not, for the New Testament is abundantly clear that our hope is a Heavenly, not an earthly, home (2 Cor. 4:16-5:3; Col. 3:1-4; 1 Pet. 1:3-5; 2 Pet. 3:10-13). And we have a grand total of one hope (Eph. 4:4). Nor does this mean the meek are to be wealthy. True happiness cannot be found in material possessions (Eccles. 2:4-11, 18-19). The meek inherit the earth in that they enjoy the best this world has to offer right now. They live the happiest lives while on this earth (cf. Eccles. 2:3; 12:1, 13-14).

Why do the meek so inherit the earth? They do so because they have true peace of mind, without which even the wealthy are miserable and with which even the impoverished have joy (Phil. 4:4-9). They have the comforting promise that God will care for their physical needs (Matt. 6:33), the help and fellowship of the finest people on this earth (Mark 10:28-30), and the hope of a home in Heaven far more beautiful than anything on this earth after we leave this world (1 Pet. 1:3-5).

Those who vainly strive after worldly gain cannot enjoy the fruit of their labor for fear of losing that which is the sole object of their hope and affection. But the true Christian, who has complete mastery of himself, i.e. equilibrium, who is submissive toward God and gentle towards his fellow man can truly enjoy this earth while looking for a much greater reward.

The philosophy of this world was well summed up by Leo Durocher: “Nice guys finish last.” The selfish, cruel and unscrupulous acquire the things of this life. But “the meek,” those who are the very epitome of a “nice guy,” enjoy the very best of this earth. The selfish possess the things of the earth; the meek inherit the real blessings of the earth. Which describes you?

FOOTNOTES

1. James W. Adams, “The Restoration of Unity Among Divided Brethren,” The Preceptor, October, 1969, p. 1.

2. W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan: New Jersey, 1940), III, 55-56.

3. Adams, loc. cit.

4. Foy E. Wallace, Jr., The Sermon on the Mount and the Civil State (Nashville, 1967), p. 16.

5. Vine, 11, 258.

6. J. H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago, 1886), p. 348.

7. Ibid., p. 349.

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 11-12
June 17, 1976

By Paul K. Williams

The repulsive disease of leprosy has a strange fascination. God’s law for Israel described its symptoms in detail and gave minute instructions to the priest for its diagnosis. This law also said, “As for the leper who has the infection, his clothes shall be torn, and the hair of his head shall be uncovered, and he shall cover his mustache and cry `Unclean! Unclean!’ ” (Lev. 13:45).

So it was with interest that I listened to two members of a Leprosy Mission interviewed on Radio South Africa (Mar. 2, 1976). This ancient disease is still a terrible scourge, especially in the poorest countries. The good news is the sulfa drugs can now cure it, so that it is not the sentence of a slow death it was in Bible times.

But what caught my ear was said at the end of the program. The interviewer asked, “How is leprosy spread?” The experts replied, “It used to be thought that it was spread only by prolonged skin-to-skin contact. But now we think it is spread by coughing and sneezing.”

So it has taken medical science 3,500 years to discover that God’s way of preventing leprosy is medically correct. His law said, “he shall cover his mustache.” The leper was to wear a cloth, what we would call a face-mask, which would hang down from his upper lip. The spread of the disease was thus prevented because the sneeze or cough was covered. God’s people were in this way protected from the spread of the terrible disease by the law of a loving God.

Nothing about leprosy would lead a person to guess it could be spread by droplets in the breath of a sufferer, for leprosy is a skin disease. Certainly Moses, the lawgiver, had no human way of discovering that the disease could thus be spread. But God knew, and He gave the law that protected His people. He gave a law which only now is appreciated for its wisdom. He gave a law which, in its nature, shows that it came from God, not man, for it contained this, and other, provisions which show a knowledge which science did not attain until thousands of years later. Praise be to our wonderful God!

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 13
June 17, 1976

By Connie W. Adams

(Editorial Note: This article appeared in Searching the Scriptures (April, 1976), a magazine edited by Brother Connie Adams. We feel that the article would be of interest to a much larger audience than those who receive his magazine, so we reproduce it here for your edification.)

No subject is more sensitive with both preachers and congregations than that which heads this article. Some resent any teaching on the subject. Preachers have often been accused of preaching “for the money.” Fearing that this sentiment prevails, not enough preachers have been willing to address themselves to the problem. Generally, the situation is improved over former days. Yet, in many instances, justice does not prevail. What might have been adequate, or even generous, support five years ago is not enough in these inflationary times.

This is one of the major contributing factors to some men leaving “full time preaching” to support their families at a secular job while preaching only on Sundays, if at all. Honest men want to pay their debts and see the needs of their families met. We have heard brethren criticize preachers for accumulating debts when in reality they might have been forced to it for lack of adequate support. Certainly, gospel preachers ought to pay their debts and try to live within their means.

Any man who is preaching for the money would do the cause of Christ a favor by quitting. Besides, he is not too bright if he has high expectations along that line. All of us should be willing to preach to the limit of our opportunity and ability WHETHER OR NOT THE CHURCH SUPPORTS US. With Paul, we should be able to say “And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you” (2 Cor. 12:15). It is honorable to “make tents,” as Paul did on occasion, in order to build up the work in some needy field. We doubt that it is honorable to “make tents” to keep from fully preaching the gospel simply because one is unwilling to “endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ” (2 Tim. 2:3). It is no worse to preach for money than it is NOT to preach for money. Both are wrong.

Authority For Supporting Preachers

In 1 Corinthians 9, Paul defended his right to financial support on the following grounds: (1) his right to “eat and drink” (verse 4); (2) his right to have and support a family (verse 5); (3) his right to “forbear working” (verse 6); (4) the right of a soldier to be paid for his services (verse 7); (5) the right of an husbandman to eat of the fruit of his own labor (verse 7); (6) the right of a shepherd to drink milk from the flock (verse 7); (7) the right of the ox not to be muzzled while he treads out the corn (verses 8-11); (8) the principle of sowing spiritual things while being supplied physical things (verse 11); (9) comparison with the Old Testament practice regarding the sustenance of those who attended to temple service (verse 13). In verse 14 Paul reached his conclusion that “Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.”

Paul accepted “wages” from other churches to furnish “service” in Corinth (2 Cor. 11:8). “Wages” does not mean benevolence. We hear brethren saying “We give the preacher so much.” No, brethren, that is not how it is. You don’t GIVE him anything. Faithful men of God earn every dime they are paid, and some dimes they are not paid. It is not charity, but a wage in exchange for a life devoted fully to kingdom service.

The church at Philippi was concerned for Paul’s support as he preached. They had “fellowship in the gospel” with him (Phil. 1:3-5). Their “care” of him flourished (4:10) and “even in Thessalonica” they “sent once and again” to his “necessity” (Phil. 4:15-16). This is the proper basis of support. Arbitrary standards have often been set in this matter. A man ought to be paid what he needs to do the work he is sent forth to do. If the “average wage” of the “average member” is enough to do that work, then let him be paid that amount. If that is not enough to do the work, then let them provide whatever is needed. It is a shame and disgrace for brethren to have to haggle over finances.

“He Makes More Than I Do”

Often, when brethren are “negotiating” with a preacher to move and work with them, or when the question of raising his pay arises, someone is bound to say “Well, I don’t make that kind of money. He makes more than I do.” It is high time for people ransomed with the blood of Christ to give up lying! Let’s take a look at wages in this country. I have before me now the December, 1975 SURVEY OF CURRENT BUSINESS, Vol. 55 /12 issued by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. This report gives the latest figures anyone has available to him as to wage averages in this country as of the end of 1975. It gives a break-down of the various industries in terms of average hourly wages, with 25% fringe benefits added on to make up the gross annual income in these categories. All figures are based on a 40-hour work week and do not account for overtime pay. In averages, some make less while others earn more. Here are a few samples:

Private Small Business (non-agriculture) earns an average of $12,168 a year. That includes 25% fringe benefits which are tax free. In Contract Construction the national average is $19,604 annually inclusive of fringe benefits. Ordinance Manufacturing earns $14,066 a year. Stone, Clay and Glass workers earn an average of $13,378 annually. Primary Metals earns $16,718. NonElectrical Machinery earns $14,378. Transportation earns $16,250 while Food Products earns $12,194. Chemicals earn $14,482 and Petroleum averages $17,264. In the printing industry the fringe benefits are figured at 27% with income based on a 35-hour week.

I called the personnel offices at both General Electric and Ford here in Louisville and was given a break-down on hourly wages from the lowest paid man to the highest and a list of fringe benefits, which in both industries amount to 25% of the worker’s gross pay. When brethren say “he makes more than I do” they are usually comparing their take-home pay with the preacher’s gross income. That is not a fair comparison. By the way, do you suppose all members are basing their giving each week on their gross income, or on take-home pay? In both industries cited 1/2 of Social Security is paid for the worker, there is complete hospitalization for the worker and his family, retirement and pension plan and an annual graduated cost-of-living increase. A worker with one year of service at General Electric gets one week paid vacation graduating to four weeks after 15 years and five weeks after 30 years. We know a number of gospel preachers who have served longer than 30 years who would never even expect to receive such consideration. The hourly worker receives five paid sick or personal days and is paid for ten annual holidays which he does not work. If he does work on these days, he is paid extra. Arrangements are made for time off with pay for family deaths and jury duty. The personnel office at Ford called me back with national averages for Ford-Philco operations throughout the nation. I was told that these figures were a year old and the rate is higher now. The national hourly average for their employees is $6.61. With fringe benefits added the gross hourly. wage is $9.40. Vacation time ranges from one week after a year of service to a maximum of six weeks. Anyone who wants to argue with these figures should not write to me. Contact the Department of Commerce, and locally the personnel offices at Ford and General Electric. These are THEIR figures, not mine.

I have known preachers who worked five years or more with congregations in industrial areas without receiving one pay increase. Plant workers received annual raises and every time they did the price of nearly everything went up. With his income remaining the same, he really took a cut in pay in terms of what his income would buy. A special hardship has been worked on men in foreign fields where the rate of inflation is much worse than in this country. “Well, the preacher gets his house supplied and his utilities paid.” If so, then that about balances out with the 25% fringe benefits which the rest of you don’t have to declare as taxable income. Besides, usually when a house is provided as a part of his wage, the preacher’s pay is reduced by the amount of the payment. If he lives and preaches 40 years under. such an arrangement, he will have enabled the brethren to purchase and pay for two houses and he will not even have a rent receipt to show. This preacher has had it both ways and much prefers to be paid an adequate amount to live where he chooses, though we are not unappreciative of the other consideration. None of this takes into account the increasingly popular practice of working wives which adds to the family’s annual gross income-a practice which is frowned upon by some for the preacher’s wife.

Another area which has not kept pace with the economy is compensation for gospel meetings. A faithful servant of God will go anywhere he is invited for meetings, in keeping with the amount of time he can devote to such work, whether the church inviting him is small or large and able to pay him well or not at all. Personally, we have always booked meetings on a first come-first-served basis and know of other preachers who do the same. Sometimes it has been necessary to get a salary advance at home, or borrow money to make a long trip, but go we did. However, there are churches which are abundantly able to support their own work which are paying for gospel meetings what they did twenty years ago. A small country congregation paid me more for the first gospel meeting I ever held (1950) than some large congregations provide now. A meeting involves extra work for a man and travel expenses are costly. You can’t buy gasoline anymore for 30″ a gallon. Food and lodging costs in transit are getting higher and we have not been able to locate any airline which will give away tickets. Some brethren will ask you if you are getting paid at home when it is none of their business and when you are there to work with them that week. Some will say “We want to cover your expenses. How much did you spend for gas and oil?” That does not even start to cover all the travel expenses, not even for the car. The government figures it costs 15 cents a mile to cover car expense and that does not include food and lodging while traveling. Sometimes brethren look at the gross figure they pay a man for a meeting, do a little quick multiplying in their heads, and decide the fellow is getting rich. Well, this writer has done his share of meeting work and has come out on the short end more often than on the long end of it when everything was taken into account. By the way, what would be wrong with a man earning a little extra sometimes. Meetings involve extra work.

Lest any of our readers decide that this article was inspired by malice or a desire to grind a personal axe, be assured that we have very few complaints as to how we have fared through the years. Brethren have usually been good to us. The Lord has richly blessed us and stood by us through good years and lean ones. If I had to start my life over, I would not even consider doing anything else with my life than preaching the gospel of the Son of God. But there is a problem in this relationship between preachers and congregations. We must admit that there is a problem before we can solve it. Then we must apply a scriptural remedy. Those on both sides of this relationship ought to practice the Golden Rule. The laborer is worthy of his hire. Let him,’ therefore, give good measure in his service, heaped up and running over. “The harvest is plenteous but the laborers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest that he will send laborers into his vineyard.”

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 9-11
June 17, 1976

By Roy E. Cogdill

“Unity” primarily concerns the relationship of the members of a local church one with another. Unity on any other level or upon any other basis without this is unimportant and does not conform to heaven’s will.

Unity in the congregational relationship is an individual obligation and grows out of the very nature of God’s plan for fellowship among Christians in the church as a body. In New Testament scriptures this local relationship is emphasized in many passages and all of them point up the requirement of that attitude toward one another that brings about and preserves unity.

In Eph. 4:15-16 Paul calls this to our attention in these words, “But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ; From who the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.”

In Eph. 2:19-20 we have this statement, “In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.”

Col. 3:12-15 calls attention to the attitude so essential to the unity of any local church, “Put on therefore, as the elect of God holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; Forebearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any roan have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.”

Still another such statement setting forth the disposition of Christians toward one another in the congregational relationship is that found in Phil. 2:1-4, “If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.”

Read again such passages as 1 Cor. 12:25-26, and Romans 12:3-10, as well as many other passages and your mind will be impressed with the necessity of humility, lowliness of mind, not thinking more highly of ourselves than we should think, kindly affection toward one another, and having the same care one for another as the body of Christ and members in particular.

Fellow members of the body of Christ are said to be “builded together,” “knitted together in love,” “members one of another” and all of these expressions emphasize the relationship that Christians must maintain in the fellowship of the local church. When any member takes such an attitude toward himself and his fellow members that creates “schism ‘in the body” and disturbs its harmony and peace, he has committed a crime against God and the temple of God and against his brethren.

In Eph. 4:1-3, Paul emphasizes unity as an individual obligation, “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forebearing one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” When an individual member of the body of Christ is not characterized by humility and meekness, there is pretty good reason to expect that he is not making the contribution to the peace of the church in that locality that he is obligated to make.

Our liberal-minded brethren tell us that their brotherhood federations such as Herald of Truth, their human benevolent societies (so-called Orphan Homes and Old Folk’s Homes), and their human societies for edification such as Pepperdine College are merely “methods,” matters of human judgment, and that they belong in the realm of expedience. But if these brethren are right in claiming that they are matters of expedience, what right do they have to think so highly of their “judgment” that they thrust them into the local church and demand that those who believe they are violations of the Faith of the Gospel, and whose consciences will not allow them to participate in such acquiesce in supporting them or be castigated, exorcised, and mistreated in every conceivable sort of way.

They promote their humanly devised “idols” from the pulpit and through their bulletins and other mediums but deny the voice of opposition the right to any expression in either. Sometimes we witness incidents of such extreme treatment against the best of former friends, the closest of fleshly relationships, and those formerly most beloved of their brethren. This is even sometimes the case when the actual support of such human arrangements has not been begun by ‘the congregation but where there is only a difference in attitude and conviction concerning them.

Such incidents, and there are many of them, evidence a lack of such attitudes as are set forth in the passages cited herein above, viz., “lowliness of mind,” “meekness,” “longsuffering,” and “forebearing one another in love.” It appears that if such “methods” and “expediencies” are not essential and are properly regarded as human expediencies and if those who judge them to be permissible have any regard for the “Unity of the Spirit” or recognize any obligation to “Keep the bond of peace” in the local church or have any love and regard for brethren and interest in their souls, they would not assume the attitude of “Lords.” not even if they are elders, by demanding that in order to have peace in the church everyone must bow down to their “idols,” for this is what they become when they take such an attitude toward them.

Truth Magazine, XX:25, p. 6
June 17, 1976