Truth Magazine

By Rick Harlow

There are many philosophies on the market which suggest those characteristics which are necessary to make a good teacher. I would like to suggest several characteristics which are critical for the individual who desires to be an effective teacher of God’s word. This list is not all inclusive but rather just touches the hem of the garment when it comes to effective Bible teaching. Teaching others was on the mind of Christ prior to his departure from this world to take his place at the right hand of the Father. “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28: 19-20). Let’s notice several characteristics of the effective Bible teacher:

(1) Takes Teaching Seriously: The individual who teaches others from God’s word needs to take his/her responsibilities seriously. Those who teach are in the unique position to guide some precious soul in the way God’s word teaches us that we might be saved eternally. What a tragedy it is that there are some “teachers” who do not take their responsibilities seriously.

(2) Present At The Appointed Times: It is sad to see some individuals who do not care enough to be present at the appointed study times. I’m not necessarily talking about students in this case. There are some “teachers” who do not even show up to fulfill their responsibilities during Sunday morning or Wednesday evening Bible Study periods. Sometimes these folks don’t even show the courtesy of lining up a substitute teacher. How can we ever teach our young people the importance of being present at all of the assemblies when those in positions of trust and responsibility fail in this area?

(3) Prepared: A good Bible teacher should always be prepared! A good Bible teacher will spend more time in preparation for a class than in the actual teaching of the class. An edifying and uplifting period of Bible study does not just happen by accident. It takes a lot of preparation on the part of the teacher!

(4) Humble: An effective Bible teacher will readily admit when he or she does not know the answer to a question on the mind of one of the Bible class students. Some teachers are not humble enough to either admit that they may be wrong on a particular subject or that they don’t know the answer to a particular question. There is no shame in not knowing! Be willing to admit when you may have made a wrong statement. Be willing to admit that you don’t have an answer but will be glad to study God’s word in order to find such.

Becoming a good Bible teacher does not just happen. It takes work!

Guardian of Truth XL: 12 p. 15
June 20, 1996

By T. Doy Moyer

That Jesus “emptied himself ” is not a debatable issue (Phil. 2:6-7). Of what he emptied himself, or exactly what that phrase means, has been an ancient debate. What I have to offer here may not solve any controversies, but I hope it will give some food for thought.

1. Any position which effectively destroys the deity of Jesus is wrong. This is the effect of the position that teaches Jesus gave up his divine attributes and characteristics. Those who teach this need to explain how Jesus could re-main God while giving up the nature of God. The nature of something is the attributes and characteristics that make it what it is. If Jesus did not have the nature of God, he was not God (see Gal. 4:8).

2. The text does not say that Jesus emptied himself “of ” anything. When we add “of ” to the phrase, and then start enumerating upon what all he supposedly gave up to come to earth, we are not being faithful to the text. We are reading into the text what it does not say. As opposed to being “full of ” himself (a modern idiom), he “emptied himself.” He did not empty himself “of ” a bunch of things.

3. To insist that “emptied himself’ should be taken literally to mean that Jesus had to dump something out of himself before he could take something else on is a misuse of the text. The text says, “He emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant.” That is self-explanatory. His taking on servant hood was a self-emptying act.

4. A good comparison can be made with Isaiah 53, a text describing the suffering Servant. Note in verse 12 the phrase, “He poured out himself to death.” Does that not have a striking resemblance to “emptied himself,” and “humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death” (Phil. 2:7-8)? As the suffering Servant, he emptied himself, poured himself out even to death.

5. The context of Philippians 2 itself shows what it means by the phrase “emptied himself.” Paul’s point of the text is to urge the brethren to be of the same mind, to be united and intent on one purpose (v. 2). To accomplish this, he instructs: “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others” (vv. 3-4). These are the instructions, but how does one do this? “Have this attitude in your-selves which was also in Christ Jesus” (v. 5). To reach the point of selflessness, one must look to Jesus. Why? Be-cause he is the perfect example of these instructions. Though he himself is God, while on earth he did not grasp after his godhood by trying to exercise his own independent will apart from the Father (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”). Rather, he “emptied himself,” which is the perfect phrase to describe the attitude of verses 3-4.

So what does it mean that Jesus “emptied himself’? Jesus Christ, in his role of the Servant, did nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but in lowliness of mind he regarded others as more important than himself. He looked out for the personal interests of others. How did he do this? Ultimately, by dying on the cross.

So, Paul’s point is that, as Jesus emptied himself, so must we all empty ourselves. It is simply another way of saying that we need to deny ourselves (Luke 9:23), for this is what Jesus did when he fulfilled his mission for a lost world. He set himself aside so that everything he did was selfless. Mark says it this way: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). These passages say the same thing.

6. The idea that Jesus emptied himself of attributes and characteristics is completely foreign to Paul’s argument. He points to Jesus as our example of self-humiliation. If Jesus emptied out of himself a bunch of attributes, then how can we follow this example? We can’t divest ourselves of our human nature any more than he could divest his di-vine nature. The line of reasoning that Paul uses to say that we should be selfless becomes meaningless through such an interpretation. It is an attitude that he is teaching.

7. Very simply, then, the text tells us that we should empty ourselves. We should deny ourselves, doing nothing out of selfishness. We do this by taking the attitude of Jesus, the supreme example of self-denial. He emptied him-self. As a servant, he completely submitted to the Father and poured out himself unto death. Afterwards, he was exalted. If we, too, will humble ourselves in like manner, God promises that we will be exalted (Jas. 4:10).

Guardian of Truth XL: 12 p. 14-15
June 20, 1996

By Jim McDonald

Cebu

The city of Cebu is the second largest city of the Philip-pines with about 1.2 million inhabitants. Ken and I had left Palawan on February 1st and arrived at the International airport about 8 PM that night.

Cipriano Carpentero and Wilfredo Samadol were on hand to greet us, along with another two or three preachers. We initially had scheduled a few days on Leyte but thought we had canceled it. That’s what we thought! We had scarcely gathered our gear and greeted waiting brethren before we were informed that we had passage on a ferry that night to Ormoc City, Leyte. The ride would take approximately six hours. But, the brethren were solicitous for our rest and had been able to reserve one of two crude cabins where we could sleep. The slow ferry crawled from Cebu to Leyte with cots and sleeping passengers on every hand. Still we were able to get some sleep  to our surprise. We traveled from Ormoc City to Bay Bay, about 50 kilometers south. During the next couple of days we preached to a dozen or so of the preachers of the area and then returned by fast ferry to Cebu on Sunday evening, but not without seeing our schedule changed again. The preacher arranging our pas-sage found out that by delaying our trip to Cebu for a couple of hours we would have time to preach at his place. In the Philippines one soon learns to adjust.

We arrived back in Cebu about 9:30 p.m. Jonathan Carino was on hand to greet us. He preaches for the only congregation in Cebu proper and the congregation is very small, meeting in rented quarters.

He had made arrangements with a facility to house and feed the preachers that would come for a set sum and there would be an assembly room thrown in as well. This arrangement worked very well for us. In fact we enjoyed the set up in Cebu and the teaching as much as in any place we visited. Twenty-four preachers consistently attended the seminar and some old wounds between the preachers were mended with all agreeing to work in harmony for the sake of our dear Savior.

Davao City, Mindanao

Web left Cebu on Tuesday, February 5, bound for Davao City. Brethren there had scheduled some preaching for us in remote areas which we deemed too critical for us to get to. We had been warned of the region before arriving there and since the U.S. Government does not presently grant visas into Mindanao because of the various factions of rebels, we were unwilling to venture into territories that were critical. We read, on our way home to the States, that the Muslims were recruiting 200 fresh volunteers each month from the region. Brethren who attended the seminar said that safety could not be assured in the region. There were about 30 preachers in attendance in Davao City. Some were men of whom we had heard before. Emilio Lumupay was our host at Toril and we stayed in his home. Other preachers including Juanito Balbin, Joy and Juli Nortarte, and Wilfredo Canas all came at least once to the lectures. There are many churches in the region and some very promising young men.

Pagadian City

Our last seminar was scheduled at Pagadian City and it was a fitting climax for our trip. We had flown from Davao to Cebu to Pagadian and were greeted by many brethren. Jun Apatan was the host and preacher for the Hilltop congregation and he had made great preparations for the seminar. There were at least 100 preachers in attendance and, with wives and other brethren, numbers grew to 150. Brethren came from remote and distant regions and some even were there from Ipil, the city where radical Muslim rebels massacred about 50 folk in March, 1995. We found brethren here generally working in harmony and we were impressed by the work of brother Jun. The Hilltop congregation has a building that seats 100 and, unlike most other Filipino congregations, has services twice on the Lord’s day. Jun is a good man but inadequately supported. He is capable of doing so much good and needs to be fully sup-ported to be able to give himself to the work he needs to do. One of the most tearful partings we experienced was in Pagadian City. In three days time we had passed from strangers to close brethren in the Lord. Brother Jun called us all into his dwelling (15 or more crowded in) that blessings of our Father might be invoked upon us. Then the group sang “God Be With You Till We Meet Again.” Brother Jun could not sing for weeping. Nor could I. How wonderful; how close; how deep bonds in our Savior be-come in such a short while. Ere we left their midst we had brethren singing from memory a song R.J. taught their Luzon brethren to sing: “God is so good, God is so good, God is so good, He’s so good to me!”

At least 40 preachers and others traveled with us to the airport to say good-bye. We sadly bade farewell to Cipriano Carpentero and Wilfredo Samadol who had been our guides for nearly two weeks. Brothers and sisters whose names we did not know were openly weeping when we passed through security separating us from them. Truly we could sing “Bless be the tie that binds.” And, as our eyes looked back upon these our dear brethren so unlike us in color, and physical blessings, we could not help but think: “Of one the Lord hath made the race, Through one has come the fall. Where sin has gone must go His grace, The gospel is for all. The blessed gospel is for all the gospel is for all. Where sin has gone, must go His grace, the gospel is for all.”

Needs

I dare not close without calling attention to the needs of our Filipino brethren. First, there is the need all over the islands for visits from faithful American preachers who can go and stay for two, three or four weeks teaching preachers and visiting in the churches. American preachers need to go preach, to become acquainted with the work presently going on, to encourage Filipino brethren to plant the cause in other regions, and to be edified themselves. The enthusiasm gained from surveying the work going on over there will fill preachers with a zeal to return home and attempt to duplicate here what they see over there. There is a crying need for individuals and congregations to help preachers in various regions air the gospel on radio. Some programs already are aired with (in most instances) excellent results. In the Metro Manila area some brethren plead for help to put the word on TV. There are many widows and orphans who need help and American Christians can find nothing more satisfying and rewarding than practicing pure religion (James 1:27). What a blessing is both given and received by Christians here ex-tending helping hands to needy widows there, “staying with them” while their children grow up and helping them to send the brighter minds on to college.

Tracts by the thousands need to be sent. Filipino brethren had this sad comment, “Liberal churches are willing to flood us with tracts but faithful brethren send none or very few.” Young preachers need to be “adopted” by Christians who can help supply them tools to equip them to preach as well as some occasional money for fare to preach in some of the churches that are open to them. Hymn books in their dialect need to be provided. Last, and perhaps most important of all, is the need to give support to native men who can preach the gospel to their own people better than anyone else! We met literally scores of men who have been preaching for many years without a single cent of support. They need help, if for nothing more than transportation fare to get them to congregations they otherwise would be unable to go to.

Conclusion

Ken and I had set aside a few unscheduled days at the end of our trip, but the nearer we came to that time the more we desired to set up our departure date to leave as quickly as possible. We had spent 45 full days and we determined to schedule nothing more. We called to reschedule our return and it was then I discovered my return ticket from Manila to San Francisco was missing. It was necessary that we cancel a couple of days in Mindanao to return to Manila to clear up the matter. We departed from Pagadian City for Manila on Wednesday, February 15th.

Thursday morning was spent in the United Airlines Ticket office clearing up the problem regarding my ticket. This was done speedily and without charge (to my relief) and our flight was set for Saturday, February 17. We worshiped with brethren at Kapitbahayan on Thursday night and heard Jimmy Bobbis, Ben Cruz’s son-in-law, teach the class. We met additional preachers with whom we were not acquainted who also live and preach in metro-Manila. These preachers (about 15 in all) had been separated from other brethren for 19-20 years but now have determined to work with their other brethren. In some instances, existing congregations very near each other will merge. We rejoiced for these results and pray for a lasting union. At 11:30 a.m., Saturday, February 17 we lifted off from Philippine soil for our long journey home. Fifteen preachers traveled to Ninoy Aquino International Airport to see us off. Ken, Jerral and I had preached in eleven seminars, R.J. had instructed 150-175 Filipino preachers in the art of song directing, and all of us had preached in many congregations dozens of times, to hundreds of aliens and thousands of brethren including at least 420 different preachers. Two hundred twenty-six souls had been baptized including four denominational preachers, new congregations begun, bright hopes for the conversion of two Disciples of Christ groups were shining since their preacher had been baptized, renouncing that denomination. We had passed out hundreds of Bibles and thousands of tracts and provided 2,500 hymn books to brethren in two different dialects. We witnessed heart-warming reconciliation of preachers who had been alienated from each other for many years, rejoiced at the scores of new preachers emerging, and saw the visible growth in congregations since our last visit. Truly, there is a “great and effectual door” opened in the Philippines but we are sobered by the fact that there are also “many adversaries.” My own personal note of thanks to the dozens of Christians and congregations who helped to make possible such a memorable journey. May God bless each and every one who has seen the need for preaching the gospel not only in the Philippines but in all places in this world of ours where there are lost people who need to be saved!

Guardian of Truth XL: 12 p. 10-11
June 20, 1996

By Warren King

To Billie, the mother of the world’s best wife:

In response to the things we discussed recently, I wanted to write this letter to clearly set forth what the Bible teaches about the remarriage of one who has been put away for fornication. You are right to be alarmed at any teaching which would grant the privilege of remarriage to such a one as long as the one they cheated on is still alive.

In Matthew 19:9, Jesus sets forth two scenarios. The outcome of either one is adultery. In the first scenario, the individual who puts away an innocent spouse to marry another, commits adultery. In the second, anyone who marries someone who has been put away, regardless of the cause, commits adultery. This is God’s simple law on divorce and remarriage. Under this law, a guilty party has no right to re-marry. If they put away their innocent spouse to marry another, they commit adultery according to the first scenario. If their innocent spouse puts them away and they (the guilty party) re-marry, they commit adultery according to the second scenario. Either way, the guilty party is prevented from remarrying.

But, as you are aware, some are teaching that this is not the complete picture. They may admit that adultery is the consequence in each of the two scenarios of Matthew 19:9; but, the adultery, they would argue, is only temporary. They teach that when the adultery is forgiven, even the guilty party may remain in a second marriage. This argument usually comes in one of two forms  and, each is flawed.

One form of the argument is based on the definition of a “covenant,” or contract. Marriage, they say, is simply a contract between two parties; and, when it is broken for one, it is automatically broken for the other. This position is usually illustrated with a diagram of handcuffs or ropes. But, such a simplistic picture does not fully illustrate the marriage bond. Here is the flaw. This view implies that any two people who are not bound (hand-cuffed) to someone else, are free to marry one another. Using this illustration, we could justify marriages between a widowed father and his daughter, or a widowed mother and her son, or two unmarried men. Of course, they would argue that God prohibits incestuous marriages and homosexual marriages (and I agree). But, God also prohibits adulterous marriages (Matt. 19:9). God has the right to restrict marriage and remarriage on any grounds he chooses. Handcuffs clearly do not convey the whole picture.

Another form of the argument is based on the definition of the word “commits” in Matthew 19:9. To make a long story short, the Greek word here can be interpreted as continual action (keeps on committing), or point-in-time action (commits). So, some folks jump on this to say that adultery only hap-pens the first time the remarried fornicator has sexual relations with his new spouse. Once that happens, the argument goes, he can obtain forgiveness and continue in his new marriage.

Those who argue this remind us that the Bible never mentions “adulterous marriages,” or “living in adultery.” But, here is the flaw in this position. In Paul’s own words, “the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth . . . So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress” (Rom. 7:2-3). Paul does not mince words. She is an adulterous “so long as (her husband) liveth.”This settles the question as to whether “commits” is an ongoing action, or a one-time action. And, as to whether it is possible for someone to “live in adultery,” we only need look at Colossians 3:5-7, where Paul describes those who “lived in” fornication (which, in the biblical sense, includes adultery).

Of course, these are not the only facets of the discussion on marriage, divorce, and remarriage, but these are two of the most common. If you have any other questions, or want to discuss this further, let me know. I enjoyed our conversation the other day, and pray that the Lord will continue to bless you in your service to him.

Your devoted son-in-law, Warren

P.S.  The way I figure it, this de-serves a batch of chocolate chip cookies, which I shall look forward to on our next visit!

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 13, p. 5
July 4, 1996