Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Human religion, denominationalism, insists upon trust in the Divine Son of God. “Put your faith in him,” they say. “Do not trust in `a plan’ of salvation, but in `the man’ of salvation.” Generally, by this pious plea, they mean that one may, yea, must, ignore the gospel plan of salvation, i.e., baptism. Thus, Christians are made to appear as those whose trust and hope is in an ordinance, or in the water, and not in Christ. What shall we say to this?

First, none who believe the Bible will disagree with the theme and thrust of trust in the Lord. We must “trust in the Lord” (Psa. 37:3). This “trust in the Lord” must be “with all thine heart” (Prov. 3:5). “They that trust in the Lord shall be as mount Zion, which cannot be removed, but abideth forever” (Psa. 125:1). We dare not trust in men, for “cursed be the man that trusteth in man” (Jer. 17:5). “It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man” (Psa. 118:8). Further, “we should not trust in ourselves, but in God” (2 Cor. 1:9). New Testament converts “trusted” in Christ (Eph. 1:13).

Second, even human reasoning and human illustrations show that trust in a person involves and includes trust in that person’s word. When my boys were little and standing on a high place, I would say, “Jump, and Daddy will catch you.” They believed me, trusted me; so, with confidence and trust in my word that I would catch them, they jumped. Because of trust in the national weather service’s warning of an approaching tropical storm, thousands will close up their homes and leave a coastal area. Leaving reveals their trust in the forecaster and in his forecast. Though it may not be windy or raining, we board up our houses upon the word of a meteorologist that a storm is approaching. The decision of one man, one doctor, causes us to undergo painful, expensive surgery. Because we trust in him, because we have confidence in his word, we agree to very disagree-able procedures. At such times, do we deliberate and debate about whether or not our faith is in the doctor, personally, or in his practice, or in his profession, or in his pronouncement, “You need surgery”? No, we do not. Though we “never felt better,” we put our affairs in order, check in the hospital, and have surgery.

Bible Cases, Bible Illustrations

Better than human philosophy is Divine testimony. Letus study several cases or incidents where men are said to have believed or trusted in the Lord. Let us see how this trust was exhibited, expressed. By the Bible we shall show that one trusts and believes in the person of God when he obeys the purpose, the plan, and the pattern of God. Conversely, those who do not yield and submit to the word of God are those who do not trust and surrender to the person of God.

Negative Case Studies

Moses  In Numbers 20, God told Moses to “speak” to the rock to obtain water. Moses “spake unadvisedly with his lips” (Psa. 106:33). Consequently, God said, “Because ye believed me not to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land” (v. 12). Did Moses believe in the existence of the person of God? Certainly, he did; yet, God said, “ye believed me not.” When one does not obey the word of God, he does not believe or trust in the person of God.

Israel  When Israel “rebelled against the commandment (or word ) of the Lord,” they “believed him not” (Deut. 9:23). When God saw Israel’s disobedience, though they were “his sons and his daughters,” he said, “they are .. . children in whom is no faith” (Deut. 32:19, 20). Did they believe in the presence of God’s person? Yes, but in disobedience to the word of God, they were “children in whom is no faith.” When “they would not hear” the plan of God, they “did not believe in the Lord their God” (2 Kgs. 17:14). “Then believed they his words; they sang his (God’s) praise. (But) they soon forgot his works; they waited not for his counsel (for his words) . . . They despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word” (Psa. 106:12, 13, 24). “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?” (Rom. 10:16). If one does not “obey the gospel,” he does not “believe” the gospel! Those who have “obeyed the truth” are those “which believe,” while those who do not believe are those who “stumble at the word, being disobedient” (1 Pet. 1:22; 2:7, 8). “I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not” (Jude 5). Who were those “that believed not”? They were the “disobedient,” those who “rebelled against the commandment of the Lord.”

Disobedient Servant  The disobedient servant of Luke 12:42-48, “which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will,” was condemned “with the unbelievers.” When one does not obey the plan, “his lord’s will,” he is said not to believe in the man, his lord. And so it is of us and our relationship to Christ our Lord (Lk. 6:46)! (In our next installment, we shall note Positive Case Studies designed to show that the believer in Christ, one who truly “trusts” in him, is the one who obeys him.)

Guardian of Truth XL: 7 p. 24-25
April 4, 1996

By P. J. Casebolt

When a rich ruler inquired concerning eternal life, Jesus answered, “Yet lackest thou one thing” (Luke 18:22). Jesus identified that one thing which stood between the ruler and eternal life, and the importance of that one thing is clearly demonstrated in the words, “And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich” (v. 23).

We often wonder today why people don’t obey the gospel, and we are sometimes tempted to compromise the terms of eternal life, or feel guilty because we cannot convert such souls. But this example in the life of Jesus and some contemporary examples should help us to understand why some folks are not willing to pay the price for eternal life.

Material Possessions

In one place where I lived, I had occasion to contact an insurance salesman. I invited him to a meeting, and he accepted the invitation. Then he asked how long I preached, and almost backed out of his promise when I told him about 45 minutes. But he came, he leaned forward in his seat, and seemed to be drinking in every word. Later, the man told me he was used to twenty-minute sermons which included social announcements and maybe a quotation from Psalms, which put everyone to sleep. He said that he had heard more Scripture in that one sermon than he had heard in twenty years as an official board member of the denomination where he attended.

I assured this man that my sermon was typical of any gospel preacher, and that if he attended all of the time he would hear a similar amount of Bible. He said that he would like to do that, but some of his best customers were members of the denomination where he attended. I do not know if he were as rich as the young ruler in our text, but he indicated that he was in the category described by Paul when he said, “But they that will be rich . . .” (1 Tim. 6:9).

Whether we are rich, or just desire to be rich, that temptation is often greater than our desire for eternal life.

Preeminence

Another man who was convinced that many of the practices of the digressive Christian Church were not in harmony with the Bible, attended the assemblies of the church where I preached a few times, and indicated that he would like to make a change. But there was one hitch.

This man was a deacon in the church where he attended, and wanted to transfer his “deaconship” from the Christian Church to the church of Christ. I told him that the Lord’s church needed deacons, and that if in time he proved to be qualified for that office, that he could be selected and appointed. He went away sorrowful.

Jesus encountered rulers who loved the praise of men more than the praise of God, and were fearful of being “put out of the synagogue” if they confessed their belief in Christ (John 12:42,43). Saul of Tarsus never let such things stand in his way of following Christ (Gal. 1:14), but we still have some today who do. And they aren’t all in the denominational world.

Tradition

One family became disillusioned with the church where they were members, mainly because there was little spirituality preached or practiced in that particular denomination. The man was the janitor, and he said that all he seemed to get done was clean up after some church supper or party. I guess some brethren haven’t become that disillusioned over their kitchens, dining rooms, recreation rooms, and other facilities couched under the respectable-sounding heading of “fellowship halls.”

When the man and his wife indicated to their denomination that they were thinking about leaving, they were told that if they did leave, they would lose their burial plot in the church cemetery. The man and his wife turned away from the truth sorrowfully, for the break with tradition would be a greater price to pay than what they were willing to pay. I, too, was sorrowful.

In the same town, a business man renounced some of the errors of Catholicism, and when the priest came to the man’s place of business to collect money, he told the priest to leave and not come back. I happened along about this time in the man’s life, invited him to meeting, and the man said that everything he saw and heard seemed to fit his concept of what religion ought to be. But he went away sorrowful.

He could acknowledge errors in Catholicism, acknowledge what truths he had learned about the Lord’s church, and said that he would never attend the Catholic Church again. But he was afraid that if he formally renounced Catholicism that he would go to that fictitious place called purgatory. Tradition was so instilled in his heart that he could not bring himself to violate it. Jesus also encountered that obstacle, and rebuked those who allowed tradition to keep them from following the commandments of God (Mark 7:1-13). But this “one thing” is still a powerful deterrent to those who think that they want eternal life.

Maybe someone else could have persuaded these people to give up their desire for riches, preeminence, and the traditions of men, but I couldn’t. And looking back, I still can’t see how that I could offer them a “deal” and compromise the requirements for following the Lord. There are too many affiliated with the Lord’s people now who allow these and similar things of the world to hinder their service to God.

We need to keep inviting people to hear and obey the truth, and pray for wisdom that we might be able to persuade them to deny themselves, take up their crosses, and follow the Lord. Some will, but most won’t. And when they won’t, there is generally at least one thing, identifiable or not, that stands between them and eternal life.

When some rejected Paul’s efforts to point them to eternal life, Paul said, “seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46). And whether these people be Jews, Felix, Agrippa, the young ruler of Jesus’ time, or people of our time, one thing is certain: eternal life is not the thing that is unworthy, it is the person who rejects it.

Guardian of Truth XL: 8 p. 6-7
April 18, 1996

By Connie W. Adams

Advice or Divine Instruction?

It is not uncommon to hear something like this: “Paul advised Timothy to `preach the word.'” No, Paul instructed Timothy to preach the word. There is a difference. A recommendation might be accepted or rejected. A note of caution might be ignored. But divine instruction cannot be set aside without imperiling the soul. To view Bible teaching simply as advice contributes to moral and doctrinal relativism. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” is not just good advice; it is a divine imperative.

Meeting Readers of Guardian of Truth

Everywhere we go in gospel meetings, we meet readers of this magazine. Some mention specific articles which they have read with great profit. Some tell me they read it “from cover to cover.” Some say they pass it on to other family members. Some are critical (and that should always be considered) but most express great appreciation for the paper and the efforts of the writers. Sometimes those who write articles wonder if any-one out there ever reads what they write. The answer is “yes.”

Bored or Edified?

“Guard your steps as you go to the house of God, and draw near to listen rather than to offer the sacrifice of fools; for they do not know they are doing evil” (Eccl. 5:1). Several times during my lifetime I have read the accounts of those who have made shipwreck of the faith. Common to many of these accounts is a feeling of “boredom” with public worship. They have decided that it is irrelevant. While all of us must admit that there are times when announcements are long, or prayers are long ex-tended and, at times, barely audible, classes are not as interesting as they could be, or sermons are long or not well delivered, or it may be that songs are poorly led, when all is said and done, boredom is the problem of the one who professes to be afflicted by this malady. Why did you come? To be amused? To be entertained? Are you totally passive? Is there not a mental effort to be made on your part to offer worship to the Lord? Parents should be watchful about this attitude in their children. If they do not want to sing, or are fidgety during prayer, or want to talk during the Lord’s supper, or don’t want to stand when the congregation is asked to do so, then these are signs of an attitude problem that needs some adjustment. All of us who take a leading part in any worship gathering ought to do our best to improve our part. But the spirit of the worshiper is crucial to pleasing the Lord. When we have grandchildren who tell us they are “bored” they soon learn that is a fast track to a chore so their minds will be occupied and they won’t be “bored.” That is a state of mind which is under the control of each individual. Are you “bored”? Then do some-thing about your attitude.

Never Enough

“He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves abundance with its income. This too is vanity” (Eccl. 5:10). The lesson here is clear: Money does not satisfy. He who has much still wants more. It is reported that someone asked John D. Rockefeller how much money he wanted. He replied, “Just a little more.” Paul said, “For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tim. 6:10). Poverty is not very satisfying either. There is no virtue in it any more than there is in great wealth. The truth is that money has no character of its own. It assumes the character of whomever owns it. $100 can be spent on lottery tickets, alcohol, or pornography. Or it could be used to feed your family, pay a debt, help someone in need, or to preach the gospel. But Jesus was right when he said, “For one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses” (Luke 12:15). So, put your trust in the Lord. He is an all-sufficient provider.

“The Good Ole Days”

“Do not say, Why were the former days better than these? For you do not inquire wisely concerning this” (Eccl. 7:10). Every younger generation has heard from seniors about the “good ole days.” There are lessons to be learned from history. And there is something good about preserving our heritage. I yet recall many of the stories told by my parents and grandmother when I was a child. But it is entirely possible for the older to abuse the younger about the “good ole days.” Inherent in some of these accounts is the notion that the younger are somehow inferior because they were not born sooner. They cannot help that. There is an implied superiority in such statements as “you just wait until you get to be 75 (or 80, or 85).” Well if they make it to that venerable age, they will have to do just that  “just wait.” Sometimes accounts of the former days include the implication that those who lived through that time were infinitely wiser and remarkably purer than the present generation. And it is possible for that to be so since civilizations tend to decay with time.

But everything about “the good ole days” was not so great or necessarily good. We tend to romanticize the former days. The cowboys of the old west have been elevated to the status of folk heroes. But their life was hard, filled with tedium, brought little financial reward and was far from pleasant. Have you ever been downwind of a stock yard? I know of a congregation that canceled a service because the air conditioner went out on a hot summer Sunday. In the “good ole days” nobody had air conditioning. They opened the windows and created a breeze with fans supplied by the funeral home. I have drawn all the water from a well with a rope tied to the end of a bucket that I care to. I like my faucet in the house, thank you! I have slept under so much cover on a bitterly cold winter night that it was hard to turn over. I’ll just keep my electric blanket, thanks!

There are congregations that live continually in the past. It is sad to see once large and thriving congregations reduced to a mere handful, oftentimes still meeting in the same large house and with some of the older members still trying to relive the glory days of yesteryear when well known men preached to large audiences and where great battles for truth and right were fought. The history of those days ought to be remembered. But congregations have to face present realities and adjust to changes that time and tide have wrought. While we all must be anchored to the truth of the gospel, let us be sure we know the difference in that and being tied to traditions of our own making. Some have become so attached to a piece of physical property that they have lost sight of the true work of the church and the changed prospects for success in a given place. Christ is still head of the church. It is still the “pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). Its business is still to sound out the gospel (1 Thess. 1:8). Listen, brethren! We cannot go into rewind! Yesterday is gone. We can study it and we can learn from the experiences of those who lived it. But we cannot recall it. We are here now and there is work to do, now. Let us “rise up and build.”

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 17, p. 3-4
September 5, 1996

By Mike Willis

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction (2 Pet. 2:1)

This is the only text in the New Testament in which the words “false teachers” occurs. It is translated from the Greek word pseudodidaskaloi. The argument that is made about who is a false teacher is this: The word pseudomai means “to lie” and when the prefix pseudo- is joined to a word, such as teacher (didaskalos), the emphasis is on his lying, deceitful, and dishonest ways. Hence, to be a “false teacher” says nothing about the content of what is preached. A “false teacher” may be teaching what is the truth, but he is a false teacher because of his lying, deceitful, and dishonest ways.

Certainly no one wishes to defend anyone who is lying, deceitful and dishonest. Those who manifest these traits are ungodly and unworthy of fellowship. Having said that, we are back to the issue of whether or not the descriptive term “false teachers” says anything about the content of what is preached. In order to arrive at a conclusion about this matter, we are forced to investigate the meaning of the pseudo word group.

Looking at the Lexicons

Looking at the root meaning of the Greek word, Conzelmann wrote in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (IX:594-603), “The derivation of the root is uncertain. The primary meaning is `false’ in the broad sense.” He then gave several examples such as “breach of an agreement,” “false assertion,” “error,” “a deliberately false statement.” The active verb means “to deceive” and the passive verb means “to be deceived,” “to deceive oneself.” In the middle voice, the word means “to speak falsely . . . though only the context and not the term itself shows whether this is intentional or not.” Conzelmann added that the noun pseudos means “what is untrue,” “deceit,” “falsehood,” “lying,” “lie.”

One can easily see how this word group is used to refer to intentional deception, what we commonly call “lying.” Many who are “false” intentionally deceive others. But this is not the only usage of the word group.

An antithesis exists between what is true (aletheia) and what is false (pseudos). This usage is rooted in the Old Testament contrast between truth and error (IX:598-599). The Dictionary of New Testament Theology (edited by Colin Brown), in defining pseudomai, says, The Old Testament proclaims that God is truthful. He and his word can be trusted. When salvation or calamity is prophesied, it is also fulfilled. “God is not a man that he should lie. . . . Has he said and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfil it?” (Num. 23:19; cf. 1 Sam. 15:29). The God-ness of God is proved by the truth of his word and his faithfulness in fulfilling it.

Man, however, has fallen prey to a lie; he has disassociated himself from God, and does not let him be the Lord who, in truth, he is. The prophets make the accusation that God’s people have fallen prey to a lie. Instead of trusting their Lord, they rely on their own strength and on political alliances. They listen to false prophets (Jer. 5:31; Ezek. 13:19 and after), who flatter them and give them false prophecies of salvation, who preach about “drinking and strong drink” (Mic. 2:11), and who use whitewash over their sins (Ezek. 22:28). Hosea pro-claimed the charge from God, “You have ploughed iniquity, you have reaped injustice, you have eaten the fruit of lies” (10:13). The most serious accusation was that the people have put their faith in idols instead of in God which the prophet calls lies. “Their lies let them astray” (Amos 2:4). Lies have become their refuge (Isa. 28:15), and they have renounced their God (Isa. 59:1; Jer. 5:12). Lying, in the eyes of the prophets, is not so much an ethical offence as a basic moral attitude, which turns its back on the true God. It therefore falls prey to the delusion of the lie, as it does to the “nothingness” of existence. To put one’s trust in a delusory lie instead of in the true God is called by Isaiah a “covenant with death” (28:15) (470-471).

This concept underlies several of the New Testament uses of the pseudo word group.

The New Testament takes up the Old Testament witness to the truthfulness and truth of God. Tit. 1:2 speaks of God as the apseudes theos, God who does not lie. God’s truth does not come to light in the unveiling of being in the way that the Greeks understood aletheia. Rather, God’s truth is to be seen as truthfulness in the way that he keeps faith with his promises in history… .

The revelation of God’s truth in Jesus Christ lets the other side of the picture come to light  the lies of men. For men have “exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Rom. 1:25). . . The revelation of God’s wrath against human wickedness (Rom. 1:18-3:20) leads in Rom. 3:4 to the confession: “Let God be true though every man be false, as it is written, `That thou mayest bejustified in thy words, and prevail when thou art judged”‘ (cf. Ps. 116:1 LXX; Zeph. 3; Ps.51:4ff.)…. (Ibid. 472).

The “lie” then stands in contrast to what is “truth” (unreality vs. reality; truth vs. error). There is inherent in the word pseudo a recognition that the content of what is spoken is false.

Writing to define the specific word pseudodidaskalos Rengstorf commented in TDNT (II:160),

In the NT it occurs only in 2 Pt. 2:1, where it is used with pseudoprophetai (false prophets, mw) for false teachers. The pseudo- suggests both that the claim of the men concerned is false and also that their teaching is erroneous, so that in every respect they are a perversion of the Christian didaskalos (teacher, mw), since they reject the claim of Jesus to dominion over their whole lives.

Arndt and Gingrich

Arndt and Gingrich’s monumental work provides us in-sight on the meaning of the pseudo word group. Consider the following:

Pseudadelphos: “a false brother, i.e. one who pretends to be a Christian brother, but whose claim is belied by his unbrotherly conduct. Paul applies the term to his Judaistic opponents 2 Cor 11:26; Gal 2:4. Of Christians w. wrong beliefs Pol 6:3.”

Pseudapostolos: “false apostle, i.e. one who represents himself to be an apostle without the divine commission necessary for the office.”

Pseudes: “1. Of persons. . . false, lying… Also of the spirit of man. . . Subst. the liar.. . 2. Of things false, lying. . . a false oath.”

Pseudodidaskalia: “false teaching.”

Pseudodidaskalos: “false teacher, prob. one who teaches falsehoods… 2 Pt 2:1.”

Pseudoprophetes: “false prophet, one who falsely claims to be a prophet of God or who prophesies falsely.”

Pseudochristos: “one who, in lying fashion, gives himself out to be the Christ, a false Messiah.”

A Parallel Usage

The usage of the pseudo (false) word group can be compared to the aletheia (true) word group (see TDNT I:232-251). The word “true” can be used in more than one sense. It can be used to describe what is genuine (in contrast to pretense, hypocrisy). We can speak of a “true friend” in contrast to those who pretend to be one’s friend. In this respect the word “true” carries the idea of sincerity, integrity, and honesty. However, the word “true” can also carry the meaning of “truth” in contrast to that which is “false” (error, wrong). The gospel is the “word of truth” (2 Cor. 6:7; Col. 1:5; Eph. 1:13). That does not mean that it is a word spoken by someone who is sincere; rather, it reflects what is reality. It affirms that the inspired Christian revelation is inerrant in contrast with those systems devised by man that are filled with error.

In a similar way, the word “false” can be used to refer to what is done in an underhanded, dishonest way. There are those who are liars, deceivers, and dishonest. However, that does not exhaust the meaning and uses of the term. The word “false” can also be used in contrast with what is “true,” “truth,” or “reality.”

Which is the New Testament usage? The context must determine which definition is intended. There can be little question of whether the men of 2 Peter 2 are ungodly men. That is clearly indicated by such words to describe their conduct as: (a) covetous (2:3); (b) make merchandise of you (2:3); (c) walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness (2:10); (d) despise government (2:10); (e) presumptuous (2:10); (f) self-willed (2:10); etc. However, none of these descriptions is inherent in the meaning of the pseudo prefix.

These false teachers are also described as men who “bring in damnable heresies” (2:1), “denying the Lord that bought them” (2:1), “speaking evil of the things that they under-stand not” (2:12), “forsaken the right way and are gone astray” (2:15), “promise liberty” but this liberty leads to enslavement (2:19), “turning from the holy commandment” (2:21). These descriptions of the false teachers of 2 Peter 2 fit the definition of “false” that corresponds to “error,” “wrong,” “unreality,” the opposite of the truth. Consequently, I conclude that the meaning intended by “false teachers” is that the teacher is teaching that which is false.

This also corresponds with the use of “false prophets” of the Old Testament. The verse parallels the “false teachers” of 2 Peter 2 with the “false prophets” of the Old Testament. As one studies the false prophets of the Old Testament, he is impressed with the fact that many of them obviously were sincere in their belief. For example, the men who had the contest with Elijah on Mt. Carmel were so convinced of the truthfulness of their beliefs that “cried aloud, and cut themselves with knives and lancets, till the blood gushed out upon them” (1 Kings 18:28). One could not seriously question whether or not these “false prophets” were sincere in their worship of Baal. That they were sincere did not change the fact that the content of their message was wrong, led men away from God, and had to be resisted by the godly Elijah.

Similarly, “false teachers” frequently are sincere, honor-able men, who are simply mistaken. Nevertheless, their message leads men away from God and into eternal damnation. For that reason they must be resisted.

Conclusion

A man may not always be able to determine the integrity of another. However, he always can weigh what he is teaching against what the Bible says. If what he is teaching is false, he is a “false teacher” in respect to that teaching.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 17, p. 2
September 5, 1996