Truth Magazine

By Nigerian Work

The gospel of Christ reached Nigerian in the year 1949, first at Ibibio land, now Akwa Ibom State, through the late brother C.A.O. Easien. It extended to Ibo land (now Abia State) in 1956. During that time, there was no knowledge of liberalism and conservatism. The liberals had their first Bible Training College at Ukpom Aba (now Akwa Ibom) in 1954. Their second Bible Training College was at Onitchs Ngwa in Aba (now Abia State) in 1956. In 1960 brother Leslie Diestelkamp came to the Onitchs Ngwa Bible College unawares that it was a “church organized institution.” After much effort to correct some errors proved abortive, he left them to move to the Lagos area where he started a new field of work. At this juncture, space may not permit us to tell the history of the church in Nigeria in detail.

In 1971, after the civil war in our country, brethren Ezekiel Akinyemi and Henry Karamu from the West were sent by their preaching congregations, Mokole at Ibadan and Sapale respectively, on having heard and known the erroneous teaching with positions of churches and preachers in Ibe land, to enlighten them on the truth of the more perfect way. First they conducted a six week Bible class with preachers at Enugu. They conducted a second six week class at Aba in 1972. As a result of these classes some of the preachers embraced the truth and were liberated from the error of liberalism.

Since then these preachers have been able to restore some churches, train other preachers and establish more churches. Though Aba has become the dustbin of the erroneous teachings of institutionalism, no classes, undivided assembly, one-cup, one loaf and the instrumental brethren, yet none of these faithful preachers or churches has fallen victim of them.

It is pertinent to note that the Nigerian economy is in shambles. It is also widely known that our rulers are misusing the public fund, thereby subjecting the entire populace to economic difficulty. Moreover, a majority of those who embrace the gospel in our area are poor and cannot support the gospel as needed. Some of the American brethren who have visited Aba area can bear witness to these facts. Though many of the American brethren have visited Nigeria from time to time, that not withstanding, they cannot fully identify the problems facing the work in Aba area because of their brief stay each time they come.

The churches though poor are supporting the gospel according to their ability but not sufficiently to sustain the preachers. Because of such a situation, the preachers also work with their hands to augment what they receive.

We must not forget to appreciate the efforts of the American brethren in their fellowship with us in the gospel.

Because of the foregoing, we are now emphasizing that the churches in the truth in other parts of the country are not of the same age with those in Aba area. We are appealing and pleading strongly that brethren continue to support the work here. It does not seem right to stop those who are receiving support but rather plead that if there are opportunities for new support, do not relent as long as Aba area is concerned. More support to the preachers will help them to give more time to the work.

We know you love the Nigerian work, we know you have been doing your best to support it, we pray that you add grease to your elbows. We are grateful for all you have been doing and will continue to do to the glory of God’s Holy name.

For contact sake write to: Rufus C.D. Akataobi, P.O. Box 1185, Aba, Abia State, Nigeria; Friday Odoemelam, P.O. Box 650, Aba, Abia State, Nigeria; Isaac O. Aku, P.O. Box 12587, Umungasi, Aba, Abia State, Nigeria; Alozie A. Wachukwu, Ampu Ntigha P.A., Via Mbawai P.0, Abia State, Nigeria; or Silas O. Okpuler, P.O. Box 12803, Umungasi, Aba, Abia State, Nigeria.

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 2, p. 12
January 20, 1994

By Dick Blackford

In school we studied axioms. In math and logic an axiom is “a statement that needs no proof because its truth is obvious” (Websters New World Dictionary. 98). Euclids famous axiom was “things equal to the same thing are equal to each other” (Webster, 98). An axiom is a self-evident truth. We observed other axioms such as: “The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.” Who hasnt paraphrased this obvious truth by saying, “as the crow flies? Then there was the one, the sum is equal to the total of its parts.” We need this obvious truth to check our answers.

But there are some more truths which men, both secular humanists and halfhearted believers, need reminding of today. They would be obvious even without a revelation from God, though many of them are alluded to in Scripture.

1. Something Cannot Come From Nothing. In all of human experience no one has observed otherwise. A thing is universally accepted as true when no one can demonstrate that the opposite occasionally happens. It is on this basis that we conclude that the universe could not be self-existent, for it would have created itself from nothing. If there was ever a time when totally nothing existed then that situation would be locked in forever. There would just be a constant eternity of nothingness, for something cannot come from nothing. But this leads to another axiom.

2. Mind Is Superior To Matter. Left to itself, matter cannot choose to act on its own. Matter can be acted upon by mind (intelligence), but not the other way around. An enormous amount of planning and action (mind, intelligence and power) would have been necessary in order to bring this orderly universe and all life systems into being. We are forced to conclude that the First Cause was not lifeless matter but a highly intelligent mind. “Mind over matter” is an axiom. “Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why didst thou make me thus?” (Rom. 9:20)

3, Creation Demands A Creator, For every house was builded by someone” (Heb. 3:4). We can all agree about the house. Shouldnt it be even more obvious that something which requires even more power and intelligence than a house was brought into existence by a more powerful and more intelligent being? The “logic” of unbelievers is woefully lacking at this point. The word create” is a verb, an action word. But a verb cannot show action unless there is a noun to do the acting.

4. Lift Demands A Life-giver. Something cannot give that which it does not have. No one has ever demonstrated the opposite. Scientists agree that “all life comes from existing lift (the law of biogenesis).” This is one reason the “Big Bang Theory” is not a sufficient explanation for a universe that is filled with numberless forms of life. Whoever” gave the abundance of life we see everywhere around us, had it to give and knows the secret to life that remains a mystery to man (Acts 17:25).

5. Law Demands A Law-giver. Many laws of nature exist motion, gravity, etc. They attest to the fact that there is a Lawgiver somewhere, Every effect must have an adequate cause. There has to he a Moving Force that brings the elements together in such a way as to make these laws dependable and useful. It would he terrible if each day was different and these laws went in and out of effect at random (Job 28:25; Eccl. 1:6,7)

6. That Which Is Being Sustained Demand A Sustainer. An enormous amount of energy is needed to keep the earth rotating on its axis and revolving around the sun, to say nothing about the energy needed that keeps all other heavenly bodies moving in their galaxies. For anything to continue functioning it must have sustenance. And what about the energy needed that keeps the earth providing fuel for man and machine? Jam the sustainer and maintainer of my automobile. It needs both sustenance and maintenance regularly. Concerning the universe, he upholdeth all things by the word of his power (Heb. 1:3; Acts 17:25). It is continuous action and not at all like the deist who believes in a one-time creation in which the creator has no further interest in his creation or its functioning.

7. Design Demands A Designer. Everything in the universe has design, even snowflakes. The fact that the earth tilts at the right angle to give us dependable seasons every year (Gen. 8:22), that it completes a rotation on its axis every day and a revolution around the sun every year so that we can set our clocks and make our calendars, that all living organisms have dependable systems (respiratory, circulation, nervous, etc.) these are but the hem of the garment of evidence of design in the universe (Psa. 139:14-18).

8. The Fact That Man Has A Conscience implies An intelligent Creator, Designer, Sustainer, Life-giver And Law-giver Who Has A Set Of Standards Of Right And Wrong. We have already shown the logic of an intelligent Creator. Everything that any being with intelligence does, has a point to it (or a reason for it). What other reason could there be for mans being given a conscience (a sense of “ought” and ought not”) if there is no standard by which to order and measure it? This implies a revelation of the will of the Law-giver.

There are other selfevident truths, hut there is a final one we want to observe in a moment. First, we need to consider the consequences of saying, as the humanist does. that there is no Creator, Designer, Sustainer, Life-giver. Law-giver or Moral Being. It is to say that each man is merely an animal and a law unto himself, that there is no meaning to life or the universe, you better put self first, get all you can and do all you want to do because here and now” is all you have. It is to invite a “free-forall” in morality. Do you wonder at the rapid increase in crime.- the drive-by shootings, car-jackings. that rape has increased by 70% since 1933. etc.? Brother Connie Adams recently observed that no nation has survived her own moral decline. That leads us to our final axiom.

8. You Will Reap What You Sow. No one has demonstrated the opposite. Experience tells us this truth in the plant world: sow cornreap corn. How terrible it would be if we couldnt depend on this. But it is also true in life. We need not fearthis self-evident truth if we are sowing the proper seed. However, he that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; hut he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life” (Gal. 6:7, 8).

Evidence is all around us- These truths are obvious. Those who ignore them or are half-hearted are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20). Are you ready for the Lord to take vengeance on “those who know not God and obey not the gospel?” (2 Thess. 1:7-9). Are you prepared to reap what you have sown? All humanists and indifferent believers who have not made preparation for the inevitable need to take warning. “It is appointed unto man once to die, and after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27).

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 2, p. 18-19
January 20, 1994

By Tom M. Roberts

And then they grow up to be parents!

Photographers make a lot of money recording on film the cuteness of children. Without being facetious, children can be beautiful, even to others than their mothers. Boys and girls can be nearly angelic, wearing cherubic smiles, eyes twinkling, with expressions of laughter and happiness that could nearly melt a heart of stone. Little babies, especially, can be so sweet that they brighten up their little corner of the world and bring joy to all who see them.

How is it possible that these little angels can be so disruptive when they are brought into worship services and nearly tear up everything within reach, howling like monkeys and keeping everyone within the auditorium wincing from noise that sounds like a “rusty nail across a blackboard”?

Children are cute, but they have no business taking charge of public occasions, including the worship services.

Which of us has not been in a doctor’s office only to be forced to endure a little terror whose mother is oblivious to the child’s wild activity?

Who has not been out to eat in a good restaurant on a special occasion only to have the evening spoiled by some brat who is out of control and who jars the tranquility with ear-splitting screams, ignored by his boorish parents as though nothing is wrong?

Have you had guests in your home who have brought a child or children intent on breaking everything in sight? It is positively amazing that children are allowed to jump on furniture, smear food on carpets, tear up toys, break windows and leave scars on walls even while dear old mother or dad blithely chats about current events, unaware that the horrified host is counting the moments until the guests go home.

Or who has not gone to the grocery store to shop only to have a dodge out-of-control carts that are propelled by little heathens intent on wrecking everything in sight.

Have you ever wanted to watch a particularly good movie only to be subjected to the screams, wails, tantrums, etc. of a nearby child who is old enough to know how to behave but is ignorant of what it means?

All of this is bad enough in the area of the general public, but it is so much worse when we come to the church of the Lord and find that the parents that let his children romp, tear and disrupt in the doctor’s office, restaurant, grocery store and movie house is a brother or sister in Christ who let the little tyke act in the worship service just like he does everywhere else.

First, a disclaimer is in order.

It is not fair to accuse parents who are training their children to obey, to sit quietly during worship, to observe polite behavior, and who are faithful to bring their children to worship, as being as guilty as the insensitive clods who foist their brats upon the public. Any child can have a bad day, be ill or hungry and tired and act out of sorts. When a bad temperament is displayed, the parents take the child out of the auditorium, make the necessary corrections and return. We can all sympathize with these problems, overlook the confusion and know that this is not normal behavior from those particular children. Such parents are to be commended for their patience, longsuffering and dedication to the Lord for bringing up their children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.”

But it is altogether another situation entirely when we recognize that the bratty children are the result of permissive parents who are really the ones who ought to be spanked.

A few questions are in order.

Should sermons dedicated to reaching the lost be ruined because some parents fail to recognize that the noise their children make distracts and keeps the message from being heard? What is wrong with parents who let children cry ceaselessly without remedying the situation? Do these people think children should be allowed to dominate their surroundings? Even laughter and loud talking are out of place in an assembly while the Bible is being discussed in the presence of lost people who need the gospel.

Should children be allowed to sing? Of course, they should. And they should be encouraged to do so. But should they scream at the top of their lungs to such an extent that no one within five pews can hear the pitch? Some parents think it is cute for them to impose their first attempts at singing on everyone in the entire auditorium. Parents, don’t you realize that your “little angel” is being a pest and keeping others from worshipping God?

Should children be taught to appreciate and recognize quiet times? Absolutely!

When the Lord’s supper is being observed and during prayer, no one wants to hear demands for “crackers” and “juice.” The prayer is often hard to hear at best. But when crying, laughing, screaming, singing or playing sounds drown out the one leading the prayer, it is time for children to be taken out or shut up.

Should children have a happy childhood? Should they have play times? Why, of course. But not in the aisles or lobby before, during or after worship services. Parents seem oblivious to the danger that youngsters create when they turn the aisles into the Indianapolis 500 Speedway, or the lobby into a maze of legs that require hide and seek games that endanger the older folks with broken limbs. They should not be in the pews with their feet. They should not swing from the microphones like a monkey at the zoo. They should not go into the pulpit and “play church” over the loudspeakers. They should not be allowed to eat the left-over bread and grape juice like “happy hour” at home. They should not act like a bulldozer in the flower beds or play “dodge the car” in the parking lot. They should not play “tag, you’re it” in the class rooms. They should not be allowed to tear up all the visual aids that teachers have labored so long to produce.

Have I made my point?

“Boy,” some member will grump, “the preacher just doesn’t like kids.”

No, the preacher loves children. The preacher just doesn’t appreciate permissive parents who are not pleasing the Lord and obeying his Bible by training their children as they should. In fact, the problem is not so much with the children as with the parents. Children can be trained to do right if we start early enough. But how do we train parents who are ignorant of things they should know?

Not only is God’s word not being obeyed in this matter, but common rules of social behavior are being ignored. It is not polite to take your children into homes and allow them to tear up things and be destructive. Do you wonder why you receive few invitations to brethren’s homes? Can it be that they dread the thought of your children running amok?

It is not polite to let your children careen out of control while you chat with your friends, unaware that destruction is following in their wake. Do you ever notice what your children are doing? The noise level? The pandemonium? The torn song books? The disturbed assemblies? Sermons unheard. Unheard prayers? Song services disrupted?

Do I exaggerate? Perhaps a little, but only a little. And lest anyone think that this describes the local church where I preach, it does not. At least not in every detail. What I have included are mostly factual incidences noticed over a period of years in several local churches and in many places where I have held gospel meetings. The situation that I describe is a composite picture that could exist anywhere and does exist in many places. But the problem seems to be getting worse instead of better.

Two things can help solve the problem. First, parents should take to heart the teaching of the Bible on how to raise respectful and polite children. Much of this is summed up in Ephesians 6:1-4: “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.”

Second, practice the Golden rule (Matt. 7:12): “There-fore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.”

“… when crying, laughing, screaming, singing or playing sounds drown out the one leading the prayer, it is time for children to be taken out or shut up.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 2, p. 20-21
January 20, 1994

By Jeff Asher

In the June 20, 1993 bulletin of the church of Christ in Gruver, Texas brother Bob Setliff has an article titled “When Are We Going to Hear Some Sound Gospel Preaching?” For the benefit of our readers we reprint it below. Following the article will be our views on the subject that brother Setliff introduces.

The Setliff Article

He had just passed the halfway mark in a series of sermons on the cross. The congregation appeared to be reveling in a deep, reverent study of the love of God that created the way for mercy and justice to meet at the cross  unto our salvation.

So he was caught by surprise when a brother con-fronted him at the door. “This sounds like what you could hear in any denomination in town!” he said. Then, poking his finger into the preacher’s chest, he asked, “I want to know when we are going to hear some sound gospel preaching from this pulpit?”

The poor man was just reflecting his background. He had been reared in a heritage that got sidetracked from the gospel. In the name of “preaching the gospel” and “sound doctrine” he had heard a lot of anger and name-calling. He had endured verbal assaults delivered by angry men. The louder the noise and the angrier the man, the “sounder” the preaching was judged to be.

Think about your own experience. Can’t you recall six evening sermon titles of a Sunday through Friday “Gospel Meeting” when you were growing up: Hear, Believe, Repent, Confess, Be Baptized and Live the Christian Life. These topics can be preached repeatedly without any gospel being taught. They are appropriate and necessary responses to the gospel. But authentic gospel preaching is an exploration of the love of God shown in the incarnation. It tells of Christ’s treatment of lepers, prostitutes, and flops. It never gets far from the story of the cross.

Sound doctrine never leaves the impression that the burden of redemption lies with us and the scrupulous performance of our duties. It always impresses the hearer with what God did to take the full burden of our sin to himself at Calvary. The historic reduction of the gospel to a series of strident messages about human liability to commands has stood the gospel on its head. It has produced a counter-gospel that brings that anathema of God on those who teach it (Gal. 1:6-9).

May God raise up more who will exalt Christ with sound gospel preaching.

A Response

I am not certain whether brother Setliff is recounting a recent experience of his own or some other’s. I am rather inclined to think it is the former. Whichever, something has certainly put a burr under his saddle. The bulletin from Gruver is generally filled with the congregational “gossip” and perhaps a piece of poetry or a cute short story. It is out of character for brother Setliff to be so critical of his brethren. He certainly must think it important to break with his pattern.

I am not complaining. It is past time for brother Setliff and those with whom he sympathizes to frankly express themselves. While I do not rejoice in his erroneous convictions, I applaud his “grit.” However, I fear he has condemned himself in his efforts having joined the ranks of “angry men” who engage in “name-calling.” While brother Setliff has not poked his finger into anyone’s chest, he certainly has pointed it, and then shaken it, at the majority of his preaching brethren.

There is much in this little piece that needs to be answered.

“Sidetracked”

Brother Setliff’s view of the gospel “never gets far from the story of the cross.” Certainly, the cross is the central theme of all our preaching. Paul wrote the Corinthians, “I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). However, did Paul not preach anything but the death of Jesus?

In that same first letter to Corinth Paul said, “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried and that he rose again on the third day” (15:3,4). Yes, the facts of the cross were the first thing they heard, but that was not the totality of Paul’s preaching. As a matter of fact, Paul complained about their spiritual condition saying, “I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither now are ye able, for ye are yet carnal” (3:2,3). These brethren were babes in Christ who started on the milk of the gospel and should be progressing on to the meat of the gospel. The gospel is more, much, much more, than just the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.

The gospel in addition to the facts of the cross includes commands to be obeyed (2 Thess. 1:8; Mk. 16:15,16) and promises to be received (Col. 1:5,23). These commandments and promises are tied directly to the foundation facts of the gospel. They cannot be properly obeyed, nor hoped for without genuine reliance upon Jesus death upon the cross. However, it required that we venture beyond “the story of the cross” to the significance of the cross.

It is brother Setliff that is off on the side and getting nowhere. He talks about “appropriate and necessary responses to the gospel,” then he belittles preaching the conditions of pardon and calling it gospel. Brother Setliff, is preaching water baptism a part of the gospel? If not, what is there in the facts of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus that could lead a person to respond by seeking baptism? There is nothing in the facts of the cross that demands a response of any kind until the significance of those facts is tied to the commands and promises of the gospel.

“Preached Repeatedly Without Any Gospel”

It is impossible to properly preach faith, repentance, confession or baptism without preaching the gospel of Christ. What was brother Setliff doing during those “gospel meetings” when these things were being preached? He must have been asleep to have not heard “the story of the cross.”

What are men to hear? The message of the cross (1 Cor. 1:18). What are men to believe? The death of the cross (Phil. 2:8). What are men to confess? The Christ that triumphed in the cross (Col. 2:15). How are men to repent? By crucifying themselves unto the world by the cross (Gal. 6:14). Into what are men baptized? The blood of the cross (Col. 1:20; Rom. 6:3). How do men live the Christian life? Our old man is crucified with him on the cross (Rom. 6:6; Gal. 2:20).

The kind of preaching that brother Setliff is criticizing is the very kind of preaching for which he prays. These “strident messages about human liability to commands,” as he calls them, are cross-centered appeals to men in sin and error.

For example, I am preaching the cross when I preach on the unacceptability of instrumental music in the worship of the church. How so? By properly applying the death of Christ to the covenants (Col. 2:14), by exalting the authority of the resurrected Lord in matters that pertain to the church which he purchased with his blood (Acts 20:28), and by calling men to repentance and forgiveness of sins which is in his blood (1 Jn. 1:7-10).

Another example of preaching the cross would be in exposing the errors of the doctrine and practice of the Baptist denomination. When I preach a man cannot wear the name Baptist, I am preaching the cross (1 Cor.1:12,13). When I show that Baptist baptism is not of Christ, I am preaching the cross (Eph. 2:16; 1:22,23).

“Angry Men and Name-calling”

The “legs of the lame are not equal,” and brother Setliff has a well-pronounced limp. It is a case of the pot calling the kettle black when he complains about name-calling. There are quite a few epitaphs hurled in this piece: “poor man,” “angry men,” “verbal assaults,” “noise,” “strident messages,” “counter-gospel.” This certainly is language that is loaded and prejudicial.

However, he may mean that some of us gospel preachers still believe in identifying those who teach and practice false doctrine, calling the names of the denominations from the pulpit. If this is the charge, I plead guilty. However, I am in good company. The Lord did it (Matt. 23). Peter did it (Acts 2:23; 3:14-15; 5:28). Paul did it (1 Tim. 1:20). I will follow their example in this matter gladly (1 Cor. 11:1).

Also, it would do brother Setliff some good to stray far enough away from his version of “the story of the cross” to learn that anger is not necessarily a sin (Eph. 4:26). The Lord got angry enough to drive the money changers out of the temple On. 2:14-18). Phinehas got angry enough to slay the Prince of Israel and the woman of Moab (Num. 25:7). Paul was angry enough that he struck Barjesus blind (Acts 13:10,11). When men love God and hate sin they can get angry and sin not. Brother Setliff do the false doctrine of the denominations and wickedness of the world make you angry? Maybe the problem is that some just do not love God and hate sin as they should.

“A Counter-Gospel”

Brother Setliff contends that teaching men that they must obey God somehow stands “the gospel on its head” and produces a “counter-gospel.” Furthermore, he contends that this “leaves the impression that the burden of redemption lies with us and the scrupulous performance of our duties.”

Here brother Setliff talks like a Baptist preacher rather than a gospel preacher. Baptists have always complained that “if baptism is necessary then salvation is of works and not grace.” They have ridiculed the idea of “having to eat the Lord’s supper every Sunday and be faithful unto death.”

The fact that God requires the obedience of faith does not imply that “the burden of redemption” is ours. Obedience is its integrity. Hear James, “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou has faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works” (Jas. 2:17-18). Our obedience to God’s commands does not earn our salvation; rather, obedience perfects faith and makes it alive. Furthermore, what God requires is not a “burden” which we are unable to bear, that is, our duties are not such that we must live in fear of failure. God has promised that we have his grace in times of need (Heb. 4:16), that no temptation will come upon us that we cannot bear and escape (1 Cor. 10:13) and that none of his commands is beyond our ability to comply if we are willing (1 Jn. 5:3). This being the case we are confident (1 Jn. 5:14-15).

“Sound Gospel Preaching”

I do not know who the brother was that poked his finger in brother Setliffs chest asking, When are we going to hear some Sound gospel preaching from this pulpit?” However, I think it was a pretty good question. Brother Setliff has made it pretty clear that he does not want anything to do with the kind of preaching that was done by Christ and his apostles. Rather, brother Setliff wants to dilute the gospel by dc-emphasizing those elements of the gospel that make the cross significant.

Brother Setliff, the gospel you are promoting never gets around to the story of the cross. It will not begin to tell “prostitutes and flops” what do to be saved, nor does it “explore the love of God” and what he did to take the full burden of our sin to himself at Calvary.” You have rendered the gospel powerless by refusing to declare the whole counsel of God wherein the righteousness of God is revealed.

It seems to me that we have an example of that about which Paul warned Timothy in his first letter. He said, “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is proud knowing nothing, but doting about questions arid strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputing of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself” (1 Tim. 6:3-5).

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 2, p. 16-18
January 20, 1994