Truth Magazine

By Jared Hagan

It is a shame that the Hebrew writer was short on time and could only mention a few men of faith by name in the chapter commonly called the Faith Hall of Fame. The Old Testament de-votes much time and space to David and his deeds, but he is among those who only have their names mentioned in Hebrews 11. Time had failed the author to give anymore detail about David. The author could have spent hours on David and his deeds of faith alone. Three of David’s acts of faith apply well to our lives today.

By faith David, though he was a youth, fought against the mighty Philistine and slew him. The situation looked bleak for Israel. The Philistines’ mightiest warrior stood before them, challenging them to fight. The sight of this warrior was enough to cause all the men of Israel to flee from him (1 Sam. 17:24). David, however, was willing to face this giant. Saul discouraged David because he was just a youth and the Philistine had been a warrior from his youth (1 Sam. 17:33). But David confidently declared that the giant would fall before him because he had “taunted the armies of the living God,” and that God would deliver him from the Philistine (1 Sam. 17:36-37). Saul permitted David to face the giant, and with one stone, the giant fell. By faith, David killed the Philistine warrior, and Israel slaughtered the Philistines.

As Christians, we ought to stand against those that mock the children of the living God with the same courage and faith that David had. “If God is for us, who is against us (Rom. 8:31)?” This is more than a question. It is a plea to the Christians to have faith. What enemy shall we fear? What warrior can stand against us? Even if the entire nation stands against us, if God is for us, we will conquer. As children of God, let us take our stand by faith against abortion, homosexuality, women in the pulpit, and the rest of the modernist agenda realizing that those who support such things are directly opposed to God.

They are standing across a valley mocking our God and his people. As Christians, we must not flee from the giant. Today the giant may take us to court or persecute us in other ways, but if God is for us, it will only take one stone. God will cause the giant to fall at our feet.

By faith David stored up treasures for the temple because he believed the promise that God made to him concerning his son. David desired to give God a dwelling place with more glory than even his own home. God forbade David from doing this, but made David several promises instead (2 Sam. 7). One of these promises was that one of David’s children would build God’s temple. Again, David demonstrates his great faith. He believed God too such an extent that he began preparation for the fulfillment of the promise. David made blueprints for the temple and even began stockpiling supplies (1 Chron. 28:11-19; 29:1-5). David would never see the temple, but by faith he prepared much of the material which would go into it.

Let us have the same faith in God’s promises that David had. Let us consider a promise from God to be no less than already fulfilled. Hebrews 12:26 tells of the promise that God is going to destroy the earth, but in v. 28 the Hebrew writer reminds the Christians that they will receive a “kingdom which cannot be shaken.” Let us have enough faith that we “show gratitude, by which we may offer to God an acceptable service with reverence and awe.” David would have believed this promise, offered thanks, and prepared for the fulfillment of this promise. We should be no different.

God has promised many things to Christians. God has promised us that if we pray, by faith, we can move mountains (Matt. 17:20). God has also promised to us that “all things work together for good to those that love God (Rom. 8:28).” Like David, we should have the faith to believe that God will fulfill these promises. This also applies to the gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38. While we may disagree about what this gift is, by faith we know that we have received it.

By faith David, when his most loyal men threatened to stone him, strengthened himself in the Lord (1 Sam. 30:6). They had just refused David the chance to battle with the Philistines. He and his army returned to their home, Ziklag, only to find that the enemy had burned down the city and taken captive all of their wives and children. David’s army, embittered by defeat, threatened to stone him. David remembered that every time Saul had attempted to kill him, God had delivered out of Saul’s hand. Because God had never left him, David had always managed to survive. This situation would be no different, so “David strengthened himself in the Lord his God” (1 Sam. 30:6), and then he inquired of the Lord if he should pursue the attackers.

We ought to have the same faith that David had. It is not often that an enemy threatens our lives, as his was, but we all do suffer various types of persecutions and endure many threats. There may be times in our lives when our jobs are at stake. Sometimes we may find that those threatening us are our own families or our trusted friends. Becoming anxious and distressed is easy at these times, but we, like David, should strengthen ourselves in the Lord our God. He has taken care of each of us up to this point, and he is not going to stop now. Just as God provides for the sparrows, he will also provide for us. We must not allow the worries of this life to overtake us, instead, we ought to have faith in God, and inquire of the Lord what it is that he would have us do.

Although it is a shame that the Hebrew writer mentions only David’s name in Hebrews 11, we can still learn much from his faith. We must stand against those that oppose God or his people no matter how powerful they are. We must take courage even when those whom we trust most threaten our lives. We must also prepare for the fulfillment of the promises which God has made to us, even if the fulfillment may not come in our lifetime. By doing these things we can walk by faith, as David did, and no longer live in fear because of our sight.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 7 p. 22-23
April 3, 1997

By Tim Thiele

“Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall through following the same example of disobedience” (Heb 4:11).

It was finally here. After four hundred years of bondage and deliverance from Egypt, the Lord had led his people to the edge of the promised land. With Yahweh on their side, the children of Israel had the opportunity to inherit the land flowing with milk and honey that God promised years ago to their forefathers. God’s chosen could finally enter their rest.

The Lord commanded Moses to send out twelve men to spy out the land, one of those men being Joshua the son of Nun. Forty days later the spies came back and gave their report. The land was all that God had promised. Unfortunately the spies also brought back some bad news. Reports of a strong people living in fortified cities frightened the Israelites. Soon grumbling and cries of unfaithfulness echoed throughout the camp. The children of Israel had forgotten that the Almighty God was on their side and through him they could accomplish anything. Among all the murmuring, Joshua and Caleb stood up and said concerning the conquest, “If the Lord is pleased with us, then he will bring us into this land, and give it to us  a land which flows with milk and honey. Only do not rebel against the Lord; and do not fear the people of the land, for they shall be our prey” (Num. 14:8-9a).

Joshua was a man of faith, a man who trusted in God, a man who did as the Lord commanded in order to enter his rest. In Hebrews 3, we read of how the Israelites, who came out of bond-age, were unable to enter their rest due to unbelief. Because they did not trust in God and follow him, God did not allow them to enter the promise land. However, because of his strong faith, Joshua was not only allowed to enter the promise land but God also chose him to lead the second generation of Israelites into their rest.

We can learn a lot from the great men of faith that we read about in the Bible. In Romans 15:4, the Apostle Paul tells us, “For whatever was writ-ten in earlier times was written for our instruction, that through perseverance and the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope.”

The life of Joshua is one from which we can definitely learn. We can gain enormous amounts of patience and encouragement from reading the accounts of the life of Joshua. Often the one verse that we go to first when we consider Joshua is Joshua 24:15 which reads, “Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the river, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” This verse sums up the life of Joshua. He was a man who, in the midst of a people who did not follow God, served the Lord. However, this is not the only verse that we can receive benefit from concerning the life of Joshua. To gain a better appreciation for Joshua and gain practical application so as to enter our rest, we need to go back to an earlier part of Joshua’s life.

In Exodus 17 we read of a battle where the Amalekites fought against Israel at Rephidim. This story is memorable because the Israelites prevailed while Moses held up his hands, but when he let them down the Amalekites prevailed. Of course we know that Moses needed help holding his hands up and the Israelites won. When considering these facts, one de-tail is left out. In Exodus 17:9-10 we read, “So Moses said to Joshua, Go choose men for us, and go fight against Amalek. Tomorrow I will station my-self on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand. And Joshua did as Moses told him and fought against Amalek.” From the beginning we see Joshua obeying the commands of the Lord.

We do not see a lack of faith or a desire to disobey. Joshua had faith in God. He remembered how God struck down the Egyptians and delivered the children of Israel from bondage. He remembered how God had provided manna, quail, and water for the congregation of Israel. When it came time to fight against the Amalekites, his faith did not waver, but he “did as Moses told him” and they won the war.

Later, in Numbers 14, we continue to see this great faith of Joshua being manifested. The children of Israel had finally reached the border of the promised land. God told Moses to send twelve men to spy out the land. When they returned, they had some good news and some bad news. The land was all they had hoped for, but the people who lived in the land were very strong and the cities were large and fortified. At this news, the people became frightened and did not want to attempt to conquer the land. At this point Joshua addressed the congregation, “If the Lord is pleased with us, then he will bring us into this land . . . only do not rebel against the Lord; and do not fear the people of the land, for they shall be our prey. Their protection has been removed from them, and the Lord is with us; do not fear them.”

These two accounts show us why Joshua made a statement like he did in Joshua 24:15. As far as Joshua was concerned, he could trust in God no matter what. God is almighty and he has proven himself repeatedly. Joshua had great faith in Yahweh and he and his household were going to serve him.

The story of Joshua is in God’s word for a purpose. It is there for us to study and learn to apply. We enjoy knowing the facts of Joshua’s life but if we stop there and do not apply these facts to our lives they are worthless. The Israelites who were led out of bondage could not enter their rest be-cause they had a lack of faith in and would not follow God. On the contrary, Joshua had faith in God and followed his commandments. He remembered what God had done for him and his people so when it came time to trust in God at a difficult moment he made the right choice and followed God. As a result, God re-warded him and allowed him to enter the promise land. If we apply these aspects of Joshua’s life to our lives we too can “enter our rest.”

Guardian of Truth XLI: 7 p. 16-17
April 3, 1997

The Guardian of Truth, in its issues of October 17 and November 7, 1996 ran an article of mine titled “Review of Jim Puterbaugh’s ‘One Covenant.” Jim’s brother, Ben Puterbaugh, of Black Diamond, Washington has “reviewed” my “review” of Jim making these statements:

Bro. McDonald has made some very obvious errors in the tract, both in regards to what the Bible teaches, and as to what Bro. Puterbaugh believes and teaches . . . I have no problem with brethren attacking a person’s teaching when they believe that teaching to be in error, but when we do, honesty demands that we examine their arguments. If you will take the time to view the video of Puterbaugh’s classes on the covenant taught at Issaquah in 1995, you will see that jp’s reasons for his conclusions are completely ignored in the tract . . . Instead McDonald claimed that jp’s position on the covenant is taken because of jp’s position on marriage, divorce, & remarriage. This charge is blatantly false. Neither my position or jp’s are dependent upon the covenant or universal moral law question.

Here are two statements I made that might be con-tested: “The aim of brother Puterbaugh’s ‘Covenant’ teaching is to prove that God has never had but one universal moral law from creation until now. According to brother Puterbaugh, Jesus did not die to give a new law for he taught exactly the same thing in the realm of morals that Moses taught. The thrust of such teaching is to promote his doctrine on `Marriage-Divorce-Remarriage” (GOT, 10/17/96, 646). “Why does brother Puterbaugh have such a problem with polygamy? Why can he not give a forthright, clear answer about polygamy and say, `It is wrong’? He cannot because he knows such a declaration destroys his `covenant doctrine’ and his teaching that there has always been just one moral law with no alteration in it” (GOT, 11/7/96, 680).

I apologize for seeming to impugn Jim’s motives. I wrote in October 17, 1996 (GOT, 646), “It is not my purpose to malign brother Puterbaugh’s character or assign ulterior motives to his actions. I have no animosity toward him.” Such still reflects my desire. In all future publications of the tract, such statements will be expunged.

I must further comment, however, that while I have been charged with error in both what the Scriptures teach and what Jim teaches, no specific item was given in which I misrepresented Jim’s teaching  only that I misrepresented Jim’s purposes in the development of his doctrine. It is (1) neither denied that the “one-covenant” position “agrees with and upholds” Jim’s position on “Marriage-Divorce-Remarriage” nor that (2) Jim uses his “unchanging, universal moral law” concept whether he teaches about the “One Covenant” or “Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage.” When he taught his “One Covenant” he said that when Jesus died on the cross, he “did not die to do away with the law and institute a new law as a last will and testament” (tape on the One Covenant, 1995). When he taught on “Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage,” he said Jesus “did not nail the Ten Commandments to the cross, he taught the ten commandments,” even the Sabbath because Christ is our rest (Matt. 11:27-3) (Tapes on MDR). As to the consequences of an “unchanging moral law” regarding polygamy (while refer-ring to the issue of polygamy as “prejudicial”), Ben Puterbaugh acknowledged: “I am not advocating, nor have I ever done so, that a man have more than one wife. I believe the Bible shows that more than one wife provides the opportunity for jealousy and other problems. But I know of no Bible passage that teaches it is inherently immoral for a man to have two or more wives at the same time. In the US it would violate the law we live under, and we are commanded by God to keep the ordinances of the land (Rom. 13:1-7)” (Covenant, 7). I respect Ben’s candor (although I disagree that there is no Bible passage which teaches that it is inherently immoral for a man to have two wives at the same time; both 1 Corinthians 7:1 and Romans 7:14 teach that which brother Ben does not know). He has the courage to accept the logical consequences of the doctrine of an unchanging eternal moral law.

Still the fact remains that while I neither misrepresented Jim’s teaching nor drew unwarranted conclusions as to what further errors it leads (Sabbath keeping, instrumental music in worship, salvation without baptism, the physical Jew still in a special relationship to God, polygamy, as well as divorce for any reason in which both parties remarry and may remain with their second mate), I have no desire to at-tempt to mad any man’s heart and therefore apologize for any statements of mine which seemed to judge Jim’s motives for the development of his “One Covenant” doctrine.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 7 p. 5
April 3, 1997

By John Guzzetta

The first chapter of the book of Daniel states that when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah and began deporting its people hundreds of miles into Babylonian slavery, he ordered the chief of his officials to bring in those youths who exhibited the intelligence, wisdom, and good-looks that made them promising candidates for service in Nebuchadnezzar’s court. The king wished to mold their young minds into conformity with Chaldean language and culture, shaping them into loyal personal servants. Befitting the youths’ potential, Nebuchadnezzar appointed for them a daily portion from his own choice food.

Two aspects of the royal menu would have challenged a follower of Mosaic law. First, much of the table probably would have been set with meat from animals God had declared unclean (Deut. 14:8) or with foods that had been improperly prepared (Lev. 17:10). Second, (and impossible to avoid simply by selecting only particular dishes) the food would have been sacrificed to Babylonian idols before being placed before the king, making partaking of the food equivalent to accepting the Babylonian idols (1 Cor. 10:27).

Daniel made up his mind “that he would not defile him-self with the king’s choice food,” exhibiting a deep devotion to God. Daniel asked the commander in charge of the exiled boys to permit him to abstain. Initially the commander re-fused, worried that he would lose his head for allowing the boys to eat inferior food and grow weak. Daniel pressed the point, however, and was able to convince the commander to feed him and his three friends vegetables and water for a trial period, and test whether they remained robust. The trial worked. “At the end of ten days their appearance seemed better and they were fatter than all the youths who had been eating the king’s choice food. So the overseer continued to withhold their choice food and the wine they were to drink, and kept giving them vegetables” (Dan. 1:15).

An aspect of this passage often overlooked is that at the time Daniel overcame this challenge, he was a young teen-ager. Most commentators agree that he was between 14 and 18 years old. For such a young man, Daniel mustered extremely mature resolve.

Young Daniel’s steadfastness proves extraordinary for a believer of any age when we take into account the extenuating circumstances which Daniel could have seized upon and used to rationalize eating the unclean food. First, Nebuchadnezzar had appointed the food for them, not merely offered it as a suggestion. Severe punishment existed for failing to eat it, as evidenced by the commander’s fear in 1:10 and the furnace of blazing fire which awaited those who refused to worship Nebuchadnezzar’s image in chapter 3. Daniel must have feared punishment for resisting the king’s command, but remained firm in allegiance to his heavenly Lord.

Second, the king’s choice food was succulent, while other captives’ food was probably unappetizing at best. Daniel could have easily felt thankful for his lot and refused to jeopardize his good fortune, especially when he compared it to the lots of the captives who were toiling in the fields and choking down gruel. The only alternative food that Daniel could eat and be sure was clean was bland vegetables and plain water, hardly a comparison to the mouth-watering fare offered to him. Daniel did not let his good position or his appetite get in the way of his faith; he gave up the appetizing meals for meals acceptable to God.

Third, it appeared that God had turned away from Daniel, allowing him to be wrenched from his family and carried into foreign exile. Daniel must have been strongly tempted to slip into depression, accuse God of abandoning him to misfortune, and therefore to ignore God’s ordinances. In-stead, Daniel clung to his faith and realized that though his predicament was not one he expected or thought he deserved, God had not abandoned his faithful remnant and still demanded obedience to him. The prophet Ezekiel said that a man like Daniel can deliver himself by his righteousness even while severe judgments are being passed onto every-one else (Ezek. 14:12). Furthermore, Ezekiel said that the conduct and actions of the righteous are comforting to other faithful ones who observe them (14:23). Daniel realized both that God would remain his loving Lord as long as he remained faithful and obedient, and that God could use him even in this unlikely situation. The remainder of Daniel’s life in the Babylonian court  interpreting the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, being promoted, being saved from the lions’ den, and so on  bears out God’s care and provision for his faithful servant Daniel.

Fourth, the majority of Judean youths in Nebuchadnezzar’s court had given in and accepted the unclean food (v. 15). Daniel had to resist the pressure to follow the crowd, and stand firm in his personal convictions.

Finally, and possibly most challenging to overcome, the authority figures that had been present throughout Daniel’s life were suddenly absent. Daniel’s parents were completely out of the picture, unable to communicate with him. So were the other role models, the older men, the relatives, and the teachers. Daniel and the other boys found themselves completely on their own, forced to determine their actions for themselves without parental guidance or support. Babylonian exile was a perfect opportunity for Daniel to forget his past and do whatever he pleased since mom and dad would have never found out. Daniel, however, knew that even if his parents were absent God was ever-present. He remembered divine guidance and remained a faithful teen.

Generation Exile

Daniel’s faithful obedience out of proportion to his youth demands application to the world today. Parents and role models must consider whether or not they should expect this kind of maturity and resolve from the faith of Christian teenagers. If Daniel had given in to the challenges that he faced, many twentieth-century readers would find it easy to excuse him for his youth. Often, adult Christians excuse teenagers as a group by virtue of their age from the moral responsibility they have to overcome the challenges they face in the world today. Daniel’s example suggests that teens are not too young to handle crucial moral pressures.

Without a doubt, today’s teens are faced with situations demanding morally mature decision-making. Nebuchadnezzar and his efforts to entice the youths of Judah strike one as eerily symbolic of the situation in twentieth-century America. Though the text of Daniel chapter one does not go into detailed specifics about Nebuchadnezzar’s means and reasons, one can assume the purpose of his tactics. He tried to discredit the boys’ Jewish upbringing and conform them to Chaldean ways. He offered them tantalizing food and preferential treatment to entice them to give up their allegiance to their parents and place their allegiance in him. He insidiously attempted to erase the influence of their Israelite lessons and heroes and re-place them with Chaldean religion and ethics, and threatened punishment for those who resisted. Nebuchadnezzar’s generation exile resembles our own. Nebuchadnezzar and his efforts to reprogram these children in the absence of their parents symbolizes the efforts of the popular culture to exile modern children and re-program them.

Modem teens live in a state of forced exile. Society has forced young people to grow up much faster than their places in the home and in the church suggest. This world offers violence as the solution to frustrations. Wealth is aggrandized. Pornography is thrust in their faces, and flesh greets them at every turn of the head. Their schoolmates experiment with sex and drugs. The media hawk acceptance of “alternative lifestyles.” These temptations wash over teens for long stretches of time without the immediate intervention or advice of parents. In some sense, every day teens go out the front door, they have been taken away from their parents and mighty forces conspire to destroy their faith. The home, a place of nurturing and supervision, is a temporary shield, where the usual teen spends very few of his waking hours.

This exile dominates teens’ lives from a very early age and into young adulthood. It begins as early as the middle school years. It intensifies when the kids enter high school and when they or their friends get the keys to a car and new independence. It especially intensifies when they go off to college and are gone for weeks or even months. (Incidentally, the challenges to teens’ faith are as present at a religious institution as anywhere else. Too often religious institutions are expected to produce the faithful attitudes that parents have neglected to instill.)

Parents and role models need to equip teens with the faith that will see them through the moral quandaries they will face without immediate direction. Teens must learn them-selves to “remember their Creator in the days of their youth” (Eccl. 12:1). We can expect that kind of faithful behavior because Daniel exhibited it under the worst of circumstances.

Also, the text leaves open the possibility that Daniel was just being sure, since it doesn’t come right out and explain exactly why the meat was defiling. Was Daniel sure it was defiling, or was he just making sure? Makes him seem extra faithful  he was sure from v. 8. Since the text doesn’t explain why it could have been defiling, it at least introduces the possibility that Daniel was being sure. He could have been going beyond a careless sort of caution, just to be sure. Certainly an extremely mature attitude.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 7 p. 24-25
April 3, 1997