Truth Magazine

By Ron Halbrook

As the church here at West Columbia continues to grow spiritually and numerically, new challenges and opportunities arise which require good leadership on the part of the elders. As one avenue of communication with the flock, the elders at times send letters to all the members of the church. They recently sent a letter to every member admonishing them to be faithful in attendance, asking for their continued help in developing leadership as we pre-pare to appoint some new deacons, and inviting them to meet with the elders at any time to discuss concerns or problems which they may have.

As a means of reinforcing some of these thoughts, the elders utilized a letter prepared by the eldership of the Williams Chapel Church of Christ in Tennessee dated 27 February 1921. A copy of the letter prepared by the Williams Chapel eldership was published on the front page of the Gospel Advocate on 23 June 1921 (p. 585). A brief editorial note said that the letter had been “used to a fine advantage in creating a better interest” among brethren, and, “Believing that this circular will help other congregations, we pass it on to our readers.” Other congregations today may wish to use this letter as we did, or to revise and adapt it, or perhaps will get ideas from it for writing their own letter to stir up the members. The Williams Chapel letter as it appeared in the Gospel Advocate read as follows.

Stirring Up the Members

Dear Brother or Sister: We find that our church register contains about one hundred and sixty names. Some of these members are meeting regularly and working faith-fully; some are lukewarm, and while they seem to hold on to the profession of faith which they have made, they are not willing to make the effort and sacrifice characteristic of the true children of God; and some have become cold and careless and have ceased to manifest any interest in their own spiritual welfare. Among the latter two classes are some who are living good, moral lives, which is commend-able; but many who make no pretensions of religious profession do that.

Now, dear reader, to which of the three classes mentioned are God’s promises made? To which class do you belong? Are you living as you promised yourself and your God that you would live when you enlisted as a soldier in the army of the Lord? Do you want your name on the church book when you realize that the world looks upon you as a hypocrite? Do you wish to live so that others will lose respect for the cause that you vowed to uphold? What would become of the church if every other member were living as you are living and were giving as you are giving? If you were to die as you are living  and you will die as you live  could you hope to stand with the redeemed in judgment? If so, may not at least all good, moral people hope to be saved?

It is not the purpose of this short circular to teach you your duty  you already know that. It is our purpose to persuade you to do your duty if you are not doing it. If you are doing your duty, you will assist us by trying to save some other soul from destruction.

Perhaps you cannot attend regularly. You can write a letter showing that you are interested. You can send your contributions by mail. You can ask the church to meet with you at your house. If the church were a bank and you had money deposited there, you would manage some way to look after it. The church is your spiritual bank, and Christ is the Cashier. Are you making any deposits? Do you expect your check on eternity to be honored? The faithful ones are praying for you. They are spending their money for you. Will their prayers be unheeded? Will their sacrifices be in vain? We trust not.

Yours for eternity,

The Elders of Williams Chapel

 

As the elders here commented, this letter of long ago “reminds us to make spiritual deposits in the bank of heaven by being faithful to the Lord.”

Churches can remain independent and autonomous while learning from each other and borrowing successful methods from each other. Revelation 2-3 revealed the strengths and the weaknesses of the seven churches to each other, so that they might learn from the experiences of the various congregations, without any violation of independence or autonomy. The example of the church in Thessalonica was an inspiration to brethren far and wide (1 Thess. 1:7-8). The example of the letter by the elders of the Williams Chapel church may help to inspire other churches to stir up the members as it has inspired us here.

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 24, p. 12
December 15, 1994

By Olen Holderby

On his second preaching tour Paul, from Troas, crosses the Aegean Sea to the continent of Europe (Acts 16:90. Following his famous work at Philippi, Paul passes to Thessalonica (Acts 17:1), the modem city of Salonica. It was here that Paul and his company were accused of treason (Acts 17:7). From there Paul and Silas were sent, by night, to Berea (modern Verria), where they find the noble people there willing to search the Scriptures daily. However, the Jews managed an uproar there which led to Paul’s being conducted to Athens (Acts 17:15). In Athens he saw a “city wholly given to idolatry,” there he encountered the Stoics and Epicureans, there he preached Jesus and the resurrection from the dead, and the Athenians expressed the wish to hear more of what he had to say (Acts 17:16-21).

Paul begins his speech in verse 22, by telling them “that in all things ye are too superstitious.” Some translate this “too devotional,” while others say, “too religious,” or “very religious.” Originally, the word “superstitious” referred to demon worship. While the word may be used in a kinder way, it is not necessary to so use it here. The Athenians could have taken this in a complimentary way, since they did worship a plurality of gods (demons).

The extent of their devotions is seen in verse 23. They were not satisfied to worship what they perceived that they could identify by name, but had erected an altar to “The Unknown God.”

The point that Paul is making in this verse is that there will be no reason to worship him ignorantly anymore, because Paul is going to declare that God unto them. There will remain no reason for him to be unknown to them.

Verses 24-25, offer a contrast between the gods whom they had been worshipping and that “Unknown God.” Here was the God that made and sustains the world (Coll :16-17). He was not made with human hands, nor could he be worshipped with those hands. He is the God that gives life and breath to all (Job 34:14-15).

The all-sufficiency of this one God is, also, seen in this statement, erasing any need for dependence upon other gods.

Verses 26-29, show the closeness of this “Unknown God” to his creatures; thus, there is no reason for him to be”unknown,” (see Psa.19:1-3). He has made and deter-mined the bounds of all inhabitants of the earth, he is not very far from us, we are his offspring, and we are to seek after Him.

Verse 29, offers, to those Athenians, a challenging argument. Look at yourselves, says Paul; you are his offspring! Why, then, would you think of God as being made of gold, silver, or stone; and, all of this fashioned by man’s hands?

The Athenians needed only one “altar.” Indeed they were “too superstitious,” in that worshipped a plurality of gods, instead of just the one true God. I wonder, are we “too superstitious,” or “too devotional,” in exactly the same sense?

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 24, p. 13
December 15, 1994

By Donnie V. Rader

Luke 7:36-50 records the story of a sinful woman washing the feet of Jesus. This story is divided into four sections. (1) Vv. 36-39  As Jesus ate at the house of a Pharisee named Simon, a woman, who was noted as “a sinner” came in and stood at the feet of Jesus, washing his feet with her tears and drying his feet with her hair. The Pharisee concludes that Jesus could not be a prophet for if he were he would know that this was a sinful woman and not have anything to do with her. (2) Vv. 40-43  Jesus gives a parable of two debtors showing that the one who is forgiven most is the one that loves more. (3) Vv. 44-47  Jesus then proceeds to contrast the Pharisee and the woman. Everything that the Pharisee had not done for Jesus, this woman had done. She washed his feet, kissed him and anointed him with oil. (4) Vv. 48-50  Jesus forgives the sinful woman.

This is not to be con-fused with the anointing at Bethany recorded in Mat-thew 26. In our text, the man is Simon the Pharisee, at Bethany it was Simon the Leper. Simon was a common name in Palestine. The New Testament mentions nine men with this name. Josephus mentions twenty. There could have been hundreds, perhaps thousands by that name in Palestine. Thus, the fact that the name Simon is found in both stories does not mean they are the same. In our text, the woman is a sinful woman, at Bethany it was Mary the sister of Lazarus, a godly woman.

A few reminders about the customs of the day will help us better understand this story. When a rabbi was at a meal, anyone could freely come. That explains why the sinful woman would be in the house of the Pharisee without an invitation. The host would normally greet the guest with a kiss, have his feet washed and at times anoint his head with oil. To fail in this would be considered rude.

In the east the guest did not sit with his feet under the table as we do, but would recline on low couches and rest on his left elbow with his feet stretched back behind him.

This is how the woman could be standing at his feet and washing his feet with her tears.

While all are sinners, some as a class were labeled as “sinners” or outcasts of society. Some think this woman may have been a harlot.

Let’s consider some practical lessons we learn from this story.

Recognition Of One’s Need

The woman recognized that she was in sin and needed the Lord. In fact, she seemed to be conscious of nothing else. This is evident in that she came to Jesus, she was weeping, she was considered an outcast and she received forgiveness.

With the Pharisee it seems that his need never crossed his mind. When he does think about sin, it is not his own but the woman’s sin (v. 39).

The one who realizes how terrible his spiritual condition is will be the one who will have the most appreciation for forgiveness since he has nothing with which to pay (vv. 42-43). Some second and third generation Christians may lose sight of their real need for the Lord. Being “raised in the church” they may not appreciate how low sin had taken them.

Relation Of Real Need And Love

The woman, because she sees her own need, shows love and compassion (vv. 38, 47). The Pharisee, not seeing his needs, doesn’t show love toward Jesus or the woman.

When we realize our own need for the Lord and the depths from which we have been lifted, we will be stirred to love and care for others (1 John 3:16; 4:9-11).

How Jesus Was Treated

Simon did not treat Jesus with the common courtesies that should be show to any guest (vv. 44-46). These would be a part of basic kindness and decency. Yet, the sinful woman was not only courteous, but went beyond that. She not only washed his feet, but washed them with her tears and hair. She not only kissed him, but kissed his feet. She not only anointed him with oil, but she anointed his feet with oil.

What do we learn from this? I learn that when we are mistreated, overlooked or ignored, we need to remember that Jesus was treated that way too. I learn that sometimes those who will treat you the worst are those who claim to be righteous (are really self-righteous). I learn that when someone doesn’t show common courtesy the real problem is a lack of love.

The Respectable Sinner

Both the Pharisee and the woman were sinners. She had openly sinned. She was condemned by the public. Again, some think she was a harlot. But the Pharisee was “respect-able.” He was not condemned by all. He was not an outcast. His sins, which included mistreating Jesus, being self-righteous, and rejecting Jesus were not considered as evil as other sins. He was not aware just how awful his behavior was.

There are a lot of “respectable” sinners today. (1) There are good moral people who are religiously wrong (Matt. 7:21f).(2) Some Christians have a “holier-than-thou” attitude. (3) There are those who oppose some part of God’splan (i.e., elders, marriage, purity of character, etc.). (4) There are a number of weak Christians who never grow and mature (Heb. 5:12). (5) There will always be those who sow discord and strife (Rom. 16:17). (6) Some Christians have an inactive faith (Jas. 2). All of the above are sinners, but not always viewed as sinners. Thus, we call them “respectable sinners.”

The Worst Of Sinners Can Be Forgiven

The woman of our text had many sins, but she was forgiven (vv. 47-50). If God would forgive her, he will forgive others who have many sins. God is willing to forgive the worst of sinners like Saul of Tarsus (1 Tim. 1:15). Jesus invites those who are heavy laden with sins to come to him (Matt. 11:28). The Corinthians were guilty of all kinds of immoral deeds, yet they were justified (1 Cor. 6:9-11).

The Courage Of Those Who Love God

It took courage for this woman to profess her faith and love in Simon’s house. Simon and the Pharisees hated this woman. She could have been scorned, maybe even expelled. Yet, she was so courageous that she did the honors of the house. Those who love God will develop couarge. They will cast off fear (2 Tim. 2:7), put on determination (Phil. 4:13) and will not be ashamed (1 Pet. 4:16; Rom. 1:16). They will gladly let others know that they love the Lord. G

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 24, p. 14-15
December 15, 1994

By Steve Wallace

It is continually disturbing to witness the motive judging that some brethren engage in. In print and in conversation I have often been told of the reason behind a given brother’s actions or teaching. Some tell us that those who withstand departures from the truth are “fueled by pride,” “trying to make a name for themselves,” or have a “lust for power.” On the other hand, brethren who teach error have been said by some to be worthy of fellowship because they are “honest and sincere” though wrong.

While recognizing the sinfulness of such motive judging (Matt. 7:1-4, 20; Jn. 7:24; 1 Cor. 2:11; 1 Sam. 16:7), what might the practical results of this kind of judging be?

1. Brethren might use a false standard by which to judge faithfulness. Jesus said that we should “judge righteous judgment” (Jn. 7:24) and we have been given the standard we are to use for such judgment. It is the word of God (Jn. 12:48; Rom. 2:16). The Bible teaches that we are to use the word of God to judge a brother’s actions (cf. Matt. 7:20-21; Gal. 2:14; 1 Tim. 6:3-5; 2 Jn. 9-11). The use of the surmised motives behind a given brother’s actions is not only sinful, it is false standard by which to judge faithfulness.

2. Brethren who teach error can be judged as faithful while those who walk in truth can be judged to be in error. I do not see how this can be avoided. If we use a false standard by which to judge, we will end up confused as to who is faithful and who is not. If what one prominent brother among us has taught is true (partially stated in this article’s introduction), we can accept one who teaches error on divorce and remarriage because he is “honest and sincere,” i.e., has pure motives. On the other hand, one who opposes the brother who teaches error on divorce and remarriage can be shown to be in error because he is judged to be “just looking for something to fight about” or is “fueled by pride.” Thus, the way that the Lord ordained for determining faithfulness  “by their fruits ye shall know them” (Matt. 7:20)  is totally reversed.

3. Churches will fellowship and commend those in error while refusing fellowship and commendation to those walking in truth. Again, I simply do not see how this can be avoided if brethren refuse to judge in the manner that the Lord has commanded. Brethren in the first century were guilty of both kinds of erroneous conduct as contained in our heading above and were reproved for such conduct (cf. 1 Cor. 5; 3 Jn. 9-10). If we are guilty of such actions today in whom we do or do not fellowship and commend, the same verses which applied to such sinful conduct in the first century will condemn us.

Conclusion

Let us remember the proper standard by which to judge a brother faithful or unfaithful and use it to the benefit of all whom we may influence (Jn. 7:24; 3 Jn. 3; Gal. 2:14). Motive judging is of men and not from God. May we all realize that Christians in the New Testament were commended for “walking in truth” and for refusing to accept those who did not (2 Jn. 4; Rev. 2:2), and seek the fellowship and commendation that comes from “walking in the light” of God’s word (1 Jn. 1:6-7; 2 Jn. 3).

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 24, p. 5
December 15, 1994