Truth Magazine

By Connie W. Adams

Preacher Training

July 1996 marked the third year of a two-week preacher training pro-gram at Ellettsville, Indiana conducted by Johnie Edwards and his son, Johnie Paul, both excellent and experienced preachers of the gospel. I had heard many good things about it from some who had attended but had no personal contact with it until this year when I was invited to come and talk for a couple of hours on the issues which divided churches in the 1950s and 60s. What I found there was most encouraging to me and I came away with renewed hope for the future.

Arriving earlier than my own speaking appointment, I watched with interest and admiration as a serious-minded group of 30 students sat around tables in a classroom which was obviously much used. All of them had huge notebooks crammed with hand-outs, booklets, and their own handwritten notes. Reading assignments, outlines due, speeches to be prepared and delivered  all of these were required in rapid fire by Johnie Edwards.

I listened with interest as Johnie Paul Edwards continued his practical survey of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus (which books each student is required to read every day during the two-weeks school). They were forming a list of 60 specific directives to gospel preachers. There was no theological jargon, just simple, down-to-earth, easy to understand instruction. Assignments for the following day included reading Trends Toward a New Apostasy by Ron Halbrook and preparation for discussion on the subject of apostasy. There was also to be a section devoted to the difference between the Lord’s church and denominationalism.

Classes run from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. with a break for lunch and a five minute break every hour. Work assignments have to be done between 4 p.m. and midnight. I found thirty men there, ranging in age from high school up to about 50. Some who are presently doing full-time preaching work, and others who preach part of the time, were among the students. Some had taken vacation time to attend. Members of the Ellettsville church provide housing for the students and the one-hour lunch break provides food for them at a private meeting room in a mall with food prepared and served by some of the women of the congregation. While the students and teachers are dead serious about what they are doing, there is a relaxed atmosphere and a comraderie that is unmistakable. These men are not only receiving valuable information but they are also having a fire lit under them and some starch put in their backbones.

What can be done in two weeks? If you are in doubt and would like to spend a couple of profitable and practical weeks, watch for the announcement of the training program next July.

 

Baptism Becoming an Issue

While in a meeting in Florence, Alabama in July, I was handed some tapes of sermons delivered by Alan Highers, editor of The Spiritual Sword, at one of the congregations in Florence recently. He was invited there partly in response to a seminar in which Rubel Shelley had spoken along with some denominational speakers and in which he de-livered more of his brand of ultra-liberalism. For the most part, the sermons presented by Alan Highers were some of the best sermons I have heard lately. In one of them he addressed some of the issues they were facing and on which he said members needed to be alerted and informed. The first thing he listed was baptism. That’s right, baptism. He pointed out that the teaching that baptism is for the remission of sins and necessary for one to put on Christ and be added to the church was being seen as a threat by those committed to the “new hermeneutics.” It is a threat to their yearning for an expanded fellowship with the denominations. Baptism stands in the way of that, at least scriptural baptism does. Did you ever think baptism for the remission of sins would be an “issue” among any who profess to be followers of the Lord?

In that same vein, Carroll D. Osburn, who teaches New Testament at Abilene Christian University, said some interesting things in his book The Peaceable Kingdom which purports to be a collection of “Essays favoring non-sectarian Christianity.” On pages 90 and 91 he dealt with 2 John 9 and limited it to those who denied the incarnation of Jesus. He stated that it “was never intended as a carte blanche for rampant sectarian disfellowship.” Among those items for which he said room must be made in our fellow-ship were support of orphan homes, whether the Lord’ Spper must be taken every Sunday, or whether instrumental music should be used in worship. He also said room should be made for premillennialism and for those who differ on “whether baptism is `for’ or `because of’ the re-mission of sins.” That last statement opens the door for fellowship with the Baptists and trivializes every gospel preacher who ever engaged in debate on the purpose of baptism.

Ah, “the times  they are a changin’.” But the word of God “liveth and abideth forever” (1 Pet. 1:23).

Speaking of Tapes.. .

I have also recently listened to some sermons by an increasingly popular preacher which were fine orations with very little scriptural content. They were as weak as branch water. And some of the brethren “love to have it so.” Alan Highers is connected with those brethren to whom some refer as “conservative liberals” (or Consiberals, as one brother put it). He, along with others, is rightly concerned about rank liberalism among them. Much good material has appeared in The Spiritual Sword with which many of us would have to agree. Much of it sounds like a pagefrom the Gospel Guardian of the 1950s and early 60s. For their trouble they have been branded as “antis” by some of those in the vanguard of the “new hermeneutics” crowd. But isn’t it a shame that Alan Highers, Roy Lanier, Jr., Wayne Jackson, and a few others we could name, are preaching more Bible and taking a more definite stand than some of the growingly popular preachers among those of us who style ourselves “conservatives?”

Where is all of this soft, wishy-washy, stand-for-nothing, make’em cry, make ’em laugh, story telling, drivel coming from? From what common fountain are these men drinking? Where is the common denominator in all this? There has to be one.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 18, p. 3-4
September 19, 1996

By Sam Binkley, Jr.

The church here has just concluded a successful series of gospel meetings during which many of the members showed a genuine interest in spiritual growth. Three young men were baptized into Christ for the remission of their sins and began a new life in Jesus Christ. Now is a good time, therefore, for us to remember the admonition of the apostle Peter who wrote, “But grow in the grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3: 18). Not only do the new born babes in Christ need to grow, but so do all the rest of us, that we may “go on unto perfection” (Heb. 6:1).

To those who had been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ by obeying the truth Peter wrote, “Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious” (1 Pet. 2:1-3).

There are several things mentioned in this passage which must be done in order for us to grow as we should. These instructions are introduced by the word “Where-fore” which calls attention to the things which have just been said. In this case the recipients of this letter were reminded of the fact they were redeemed by the precious blood of Christ (1 Pet. 1:19), that their souls were purified when the obeyed the truth (1 Pet. 1:22), and that they were born again of the incorruptible seed which is the word of God (1 Pet. 1:23-25). Reflecting upon such greatblessings should motivate one to want to do whatever was necessary to please him who had blessed him so.

The first thing needed to bring about this growth is to put away those things which would hinder. The ones Peter lists here are “. . . all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings” (1 Pet. 2:1).

When one obeys the truth he becomes a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17), and is taught “walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). As new creatures Christians no longer live in wickedness, guile, etc., but put off all these things that they may grow toward spiritual maturity.

The idea of putting off certain things and putting on others is also taught in other places in the Scripture. An example of this is in Colossians 3:8-10 and Ephesians 4:22-32. In both of these the command is to put off the old man and “put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness” (Eph. 4:24).

Peter is specific in saying one should lay aside malice or wickedness which is evil of any kind, particularly a desire to injure another. Guile, which is to be crafty or deceive, is the next thing to be put away. It is said of Jesus that no guile was found in his mouth (1 Pet. 1:22). Hypocrisies have no place in the life of a Christian, therefore must be put away. Envy, a sin of the heart, must also be put away in order for one to grow. Envy is that feeling of unhappiness because another has that which one desires for himself. All evil speakings must be put off. These hinder growth rather than produce it. It is by the word of God one is convicted that these things are wrong, and must be put away in order to be the children of God and become strong in the Lord.

It is not enough that we lay aside all the evil things mentioned here, but there must also be a desire for the sincere milk of the word in order to grow. The desire is to long for the word of God as a new born babe longs for the milk which is necessary for its survival. Hunger for food is a natural experience common to all. However, we must learn to cultivate a desire for the word of God. It is the sincere or unadulterated word of God that we must have in order to grow. When the word of God is perverted, corrupted, or tampered with in any way the results will not be spiritual growth.

In his warning to the elders of the church of Ephesus, the apostle Paul said, “And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified” (Acts 20:32). The word of God is able to build us up only if we study it and rightly divide it (2 Tim. 2:15). By this means we can be approved of God. The Bible tells of some who had not longed for the word of God and needed to be taught the first principles when they should have been able to teach others (Heb. 5:12-14).This passage also shows the necessity of exercising oneself unto godliness in order to grow. When we fail to grow as we should we become vulnerable to the temptations of Satan, and are in danger of being carried about with the doctrines of men to return to a state that is worse than we were before. See Ephesians 4:14; 2 Peter 2:20-22.

God not only tells us to grow, and how this may be accomplished, but also gives divine encouragement to do so. Peter says this growth is “unto salvation.” The salvation here mentioned is the deliverance that awaits the faithful at the coming of the Lord and the judgment. They had already received forgiveness of their past sins when they were born again of the incorruptible seed. The new born babe in Christ will desire the sincere milk of the word, not for the sake of arguing, but that he may grow for this pleases the Lord and fits him for the judgment.

If one has tasted that the Lord is gracious, he will certainly want to feed upon the word of God that he may grow. The idea of tasting that the Lord is gracious is a reminder of the statement of the psalmist: “How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea sweeter than honey to my mouth” (Ps. 119:103). You know how appealing sweets are to most people. The figure of the babe who desires milk teaches us the importance of continuing to return again and again to the word of God that we might partake of the goodness of God. Tasting food usually increases our appetite for more food. For this reason it is difficult to understand how any one who has “tasted the good word of God” (Heb. 6:5) can turn away from it to the “leeks and garlic” of Egypt.

The Christian needs to grow for a number of reasons. Among these is to keep us from regressing to where we were before becoming Christians or even deeper into sin. In the spiritual realm we either grow or go the other way. The Bible tells us that to go back to former ways is worse than the first (2 Pet. 2:20-22).

We need to grow because there are battles to fight, and strength is required to engage in them with our adversary. The kind of strength needed is that which comes from a knowledge of the word of God, and prayer for his help. It takes the whole armor of God to be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. This includes the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God and prayer (Eph. 6:12-18). Since the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds, it is God’s word we need, not swords, guns, etc. Jesus overcame the temptations of Satan with the word of God (Luke 4:1-13), and we can do the same today.

Since Christians make up the spiritual temple of the Lord we need to grow that the house of God, which is the church of the living God, may be strong. This text says that every Christian is a lively stone in the spiritual house, chosen of God. As such we can offer up spiritual sacrifices, accept-able to God by Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 2:4-5). These are powerful incentives to make us want to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 17, p. 13-14
September 5, 1996

By Mike Willis

We have been examining “what is a false teacher?” for the last several issues. In this issue, we will bring the series to a close. This article raises the question, “Does it make any difference what God has said?” That may sound irrelevant to a discussion of what is a false teacher, but really it is not.

Is Sincerity Sufficient?

We have been told that describing a good, honest and sincere brother who teaches something that is wrong as a “false teacher” is a misuse of the term. The conclusion follows as certainly as night follows day that a good, honest and sincere brother can never under any circumstances be a false teacher. Will our brethren invent a new term to describe the good, honest and sincere brother whose teaching is false?

This reduces one’s service to God to being sincere. So long as a per-son is good, honest, and sincere, he is approved of God. If not, why not? I recognize that not everyone who states that the “false teacher” of the Bible is dishonest, insincere, covetous, and lascivious accepts this conclusion. I am not charging them with believing this conclusion, only that this is the logical conclusion to the premises that are being preached.

There are a number of Scriptures that emphasize that being sincere is not enough to make one approved in the sight of God. We could learn this lesson from the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. Indeed, we formerly used the conversion of Saul to teach this lesson to our denominational neighbors who believe that so long as one is good, honest, and sincere he will be saved. Saul thought that he should do many things contrary to Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 26:9). Consequently, he persecuted Christians. He was sincere and zealous in his service to God, but while he was so living he was the “chief of sinners” (1 Tim. 1:12-15). His being sincere did not make him acceptable before God. Furthermore, unsaved Saul was teaching what he believed to others. Was he a “false teacher” when he was doing that?

There is no different rule that applies to the good, honest, and sincere non-Christian than applies to the good, honest, and sincere Christian. I know this is true based on the number of warnings for Christians to “be-ware” of false teachers. What danger would a good, honest, and sincere Christian face from a false teacher, if being good, honest, and sincere was enough to guarantee his standing acceptably before God? The only thing that would jeopardize his relationship would be high-handed rebel-lion against God. When Jesus warns, “Beware of false prophets,” he implies that being good, honest and sincere are not enough (Matt. 7:15). When he spoke about the “blind guides,” he warned, “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14). The good, honest, and sincere Christian who follows a false teacher (and perhaps unintentionally be-comes a false teacher) falls into the ditch just as certainly as the non-Christian who follows the blind guide.

Roy E. Cogdill On Sincerity

Brother Cogdill analyzed the doctrine that “sincerity saves” correctly in Faith and the Faith. He wrote,

But a great many people who readily agree that faith is essential and faith is important will deny the essentiality and importance of it by saying that it does not matter what a man believes, just so he is sincere. Their conception of the truth is that there is not any fixed, definite truth. It isall relative, and it does not matter what you believe about any given thing, if you are honest, earnest and sincere.

This means, first of all, that truth cannot be determined, that it has not been revealed, and that there is no way to learn what the truth is. In such a view, it would be impossible for a man to exercise faith in truth  faith prescribed by it, faith founded it. If the truth is relative, there is not any fixed standard by which we are to learn what is right and what is wrong in the sight of God. If there is no medium by which truth an be ascertained, by which it can be tested and by which it can be tried, then certainly there is not any way that a man can determine what to believe. And if it is not important what we believe, then it is not important whether or not we do believe.

If believing one thing is just as good as believing some-thing else, if it does not matter today what a man believes, it cannot and could not ever matter what a man believed. And it could not matter therefore, whether a man believed the Bible. Whatever the Bible said about anything would be of no importance, because it would not matter whether or not one believed. If one honestly disbelieved what the Bible teaches on any point, he would be just as well off as to honestly believe what the Bible teaches. Therefore what the Bible teaches would be of no importance.

Just so a man is honest and sincere, in this view it cannot matter what he believes  whether or not he believes this or that or anything. That is equivalent to saying it does not matter whether or not he believes what God says, and that is equivalent to saying that it does not matter what God says! So, you can throw your Bible on the junk pile and forget about it, go your way and do as you please, walk after the vanity of your mind, and be just as well off as if you learned and believed everything the Bible records (39-40).

Brother Cogdill has correctly analyzed the “good, honest, and sincere” issue.

Conclusion

We have shown the following in this series: (a) The concept that “false teacher” does not describe the content of what is preached but the character of the teacher is a fundamental part of the unity-in-diversity movement; (b) Some among us have accepted this new definition of “false teacher”; (c) The New Testament description of a “false teacher” describes the content of what is preached without regard to the moral character of the one teaching it; (d) Denying that the content of the message is what makes a man a false teacher leads to the conclusion that no good, honest, and sincere teacher could ever be described as a false teacher regardless of what he taught; (d) Shown that if this is the case, what God speaks does not matter.

A concept that leads to this last conclusion is fundamentally flawed and is dangerous. For this reason, we reject the concept that “false teacher” is used to describe the moral character of a man and not the content of what he teaches.

How better to conclude this series than to remind our-selves of the exhortation that Paul gave Timothy: “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee” (1 Tim. 4:16). By implication, the person who does not take heed to himself and his doctrine will lose his own soul and lead others into damnation with him, regardless of how good, honest and sincere he may be.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 18, p. 2
September 19, 1996

By Randy Blackaby

Religion and politics  the two subjects you’ve always been advised never to discuss with your friends  are in great upheaval in America. .

And, despite the fact we’ve always been warned not to mix politics and religion, the upheavals in the two are occurring simultaneously.

There also are some parallels in the types of changes occurring in these two controversial and emotional realms.

In politics there is less and less distinction between the two predominate parties. Fewer people identify as Re-publican or Democrat and more and more declare themselves “independents.” And, more people simply have dropped out of the political process. Voter turnout is embarrassingly small for the leading democratic nation of the world.

Turning our attention to religion, we see the parallels. There is less and less difference between the major Catholic and Protestant faiths. Fewer people identify with any “church” and if they do, they are attracted to new churches that claim to be undenominational and free of doctrinal positions. Also, as in politics, fewer and fewer people actually go to worship  about 20% of Protestants and 28% of Catholics.

What do these trends and statistics mean? Do they mean Americans have lost interest in politics and religion? Some have so suggested.

But this hardly seems the case. The topics of the radio and TV talk shows, as well as the debates around the nation’s coffee tables suggest politics is alive and well.

The same is true of religion. While fewer and fewer people go to houses of worship, polls show 94% of Americans say they believe in God and 84% believe in a personal God with whom they can communicate via prayer.

The media finally seems to be taking some interest in religion, other than to ridicule and demean it. Psychiatry seems to be recognizing the positive role of religion in sound mental heath and more and more writing is dealing with the “spiritual” aspect of life.

Again, what does this all mean?

I don’t know all the answers, for sure. But Americans seem to be saying that traditional political parties have failed to convey public expectations to and through government. Discussions of third parties abound. And, the two major parties, fearing they may join the dinosaurs, are trying to revamp their positions and images.

Many of the mainline denominations which left the spiritual realm in past decades to address perceived social needs are finding their members going elsewhere to fill the spiritual void. Old denominations, losing members by the tens of thousands, are trying to survive by copying the tactics of the newer denominations.

What still seems unclear in both politics and religion, however, is whether we know what we are looking for. Both arenas seem more driven by emotion than reason. There is an absence of standards in both realms.

The Constitution and the law no longer are sacred in politics. They are deemed subject to constant change at the whim or fancy of politicians and public. And the same is true in religion. The Bible no longer is the standard of authority to most of the religions and there is no fear among most church-goers about changing God’s law to suit their own desires.

What the immediate results of these turbulent times will be is unclear. What politics and religion will look like as a new millennium dawns is yet unknown.

What should be clear to Christians is that teaching the doctrine and gospel of Christ is as needed as ever. Our mission is clear (Mark 16:15-16). A world is searching for truth, but doesn’t seem to know where to find it.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 18, p. 1
September 19, 1996