Truth Magazine

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

By Louis Sharp

C.S. Lewis wrote: “The safest road to hell is the gradual one  the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. The long, dull, monotonous years of middle-aged prosperity or adversity are excellent campaigning weather for the devil.” Another has said, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Most of us need to be shaken out of our lethargy in living the Christian life. It is so easy to be lulled to sleep, and the devil is well versed in crooning the lullabies of contentment. “Take thine ease,” he sings. “You have done your part,” he warbles. And we are so taken in with his flattery.

Yes, the road to hell for the fallen children of God is a gradual one. The way is unmarked, and one becomes lost is unfamiliar territory. In middle years, one is easily lost, either in prosperity or in adversity. It makes little difference to our adversary. He will claim us in either condition.

When one does not feel so well and has lost that “get-up-and-go” feeling, it is then the tempter begins to call on us. Then is the time to take “the sword of the Spirit” and wield it wisely. Recall the warning given to the church in Smyrna, “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and 1 will give thee a crown of life” (Rev. 2:10). The reward is for the faithful!

Brother Paul, who suffered so much for his Lord, reminded the Corinthian church, “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord” (1 Cor. 15:58).

Hang in there, fellow-servants. Do not be lulled to slumber-land by Satan. Keep on toiling in service to your Lord, because, “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God” (Heb. 4:9).

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 2, p. 15
January 20, 1994

By Donald Townsley

In Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language the word secularism is defined as “a system of doctrines and practices that disregards or rejects any form of religious faith and worship,” and in the New Expanded Webster’s Dictionary as “the elimination of the religious element from life.” These definitions well describe the secular-humanism that has been at work in our nation for over thirty years. It has gradually gained influence over the minds of many people. Many who have accepted the secularist view have become our national leaders in government! They have worked diligently to secularize our society and, sadly, have gone a long way toward accomplishing their goal.

The secularists say that there is no objective truth concerning what is right and what is wrong: that there is no such thing as ethical or moral truth  everything is “relative.” They believe that “man is the measure of all things”: morals are “man-centered” not God-centered, so no one has a right to say that anything is wrong! To the secularist, ethics are relative and situational. They believe that morality rests on the basic needs of a society at any given time: that moral values come from human experience, and what may be right for today’s society may be wrong for tomorrow’s. They do not believe that man can have a permanent set of values as God has laid down in his word.

This secular society that we live in is becoming a society of pluralism. Pluralism is the universal acceptance of all beliefs. It is the tolerance of any kind of action: going out of the way to please people no matter what their moral conduct may be. Pluralism is about sensitivity and tolerance. It is not concerned about what is morally right or wrong from the standpoint of what God has said in his word; it is concerned with a greater diversity that will please the most people regardless of their moral conduct. (Note: The church is being affected with pluralism. Many congregations are dealing less and less with the moral conduct of the members because they want to please them, not correct them. Sermons on dancing, immodesty, marriage, divorce and remarriage and social drinking are being heard less and less as we become a pluralistic society. Yes, it is having its impact on the people of God!)

The biblical doctrine of morals has formed the basis of our laws and culture in America until recent years. Because of the influence of the secularists in our nation (and in our government) the consensus of what is right and what is wrong has shifted from the biblical doctrine of morals to the secularist view. This has brought great changes in our society. By rejecting God and his word as the standard for man in morality and accepting the views of secularism, we have seen human life de-valued. Human life is of very little value to many people in this country! Millions of little babies have been killed in the womb since 1973 because they were “unwanted” or “imperfect.” The suicide rate has increased by more than four-hundred percent since 1950; the teen suicide rate has more than tripled since 1960. Euthanasia is on the increase in this country. Dr. Jack Kevorkian has received much notoriety with his “death machine” as he has aided people to commit suicide, and some states are now engaged in a battle over euthanasia. In the past seven years murders committed by those who are 18-20 years old have increased 120 percent! Man seems to put very little value on human life, but God said that it is valuable and no man has a right to take it (Gen. 9:6; Prov. 6:17; 1 John 3:15; Matt. 2:11-12; 10:31).

The secular philosophers of our day are trying to make ethics independent of biblical teaching on morals. They are intolerant of anyone who holds and teaches that there are absolutes in morals based upon the word of God as the standard. So, the Christian finds himself in great conflict with secularism over what is right. These are “perilous times” (2 Tim. 3:1, NKJV) for the Christian. He finds himself living in a nation that he loves, where he has had great freedom, but now faces a government with court-enforced secularism! A school teacher can hand out condoms to students, but is forbidden by law to hand out Bibles! Students can engage in any kind of activity in school, but cannot talk about God or pray to him without threat of a lawsuit! The “gay-rights” movement is seeking to get laws passed that would give homosexuals equal rights under the law. If this happens it will have serious implications for Christians as they take a strong stand against the sin of homosexuality. In large cities such as New York and San Francisco homosexuality is being taught in public schools as an “alternate lifestyle,” and if this is being taught in large cities, how long will it be before it is taught throughout the nation?

Secularism exalts tolerance, not truth! People who stand up for the truth of the Bible are called “intolerant” and “a people filled with bigotry and hate!” Brethren, we face perilous times in the future because our nation and its people have undergone great changes morally. “In 1962, polls indicated that at least 65 percent of all Americans believed the Bible to be true. In 1992 polls indicated that only 32 percent do” (Chuck Colson, Can We Be Good Without God?).

As Christians we must stand up for the moral teaching of the word of God, and we must live it out in our daily lives (Rom. 12:1,2; Matt. 5:13-16). We must do more teaching showing that the Bible is the inspired word of God if we are to combat the unbelief that has come among us (2 Tim. 3:16-17). We must pray fervently for God to save this nation from destruction (1 Tim. 2:1-4). No nation in history has been able to stand for long when it loses its morals (Psa. 9:17). Gospel preachers must stop compromising on God’s moral standard for marriage and divorce and worldliness (1 John 2:15-17). Brethren, our souls and the survival of our free nation are at stake! Let those of us who preach the gospel do so with greater urgency and enthusiasm. Let parents and churches become more diligent in teaching our children about these matters! (Eph. 6:4; Psa. 78:1-8) Christians of the first century made an impact on the pagan world; Christians today can make an impact on secular America if we will revive the evangelistic spirit of first century Christians and preachers (Acts 8:4; 17:22-31; 1 Cor. 6:9-11). We must not let secularism, pluralism, or any “ism” affect our militant stand for Bible morals!

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 3, p. 2
February 3, 1994

By W.G. “Bert” Enostacion

Time and time again, too many people believe the word “responsibility” has a negative notion; to them, the word is better avoided than fulfilled. However, such is a complete opposite situation to those faithful proclaimers of the Word who have born scars in standing on the truth; to them, the word is RESPONSE-ABILITY! It is always sought rather than avoided; emphatically embraced rather than rejected. Happiness to tackle such day-to-day responsibility has been felt by each worker.

Responsibility Demonstrated

The New Testament Christians set forth such principles. Notice when the early church suffered persecutions, “those who were scattered around went out preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). Such curtailing action made by those people around them did not hinder these faithful men from pro-claiming the gospel of God; instead members multiplied tremendously.

We are familiar with God’s calling on the Apostle Paul “to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God”(Acts 26:18). Taking on the same ground, we are here preaching the same gospel, so that through our never-ending efforts, we could do the same that people “may turn from darkness to light and from Satan to God!”

Men and women by the thousands are dying all over the world every day without the opportunity of hearing the gospel of God. Many of these might have been saved, had someone taught them God’s word, though it is equally true also, that many of these may not obey the truth even had they learned it. Nevertheless, this is what God had charged every faithful member in every generation since the day of Pentecost, that the saving gospel may be preach to every creature (Matt. 28:19-20; Mk. 16:15-16; Rom. 1:16).

Tracing such demonstrations of responsibility since the early beginning of the church down to the road of restoration, many honorable and faithful men shed their own blood in defense of the gospel. If not through their untiring efforts, we could not have been scripturally grounded today as it has been if not to their call of such responsibility before God. We owe much to these faithful men who set “footprints in the sands of time” for us today to follow.

The same demonstrations of responsibility were seen when the Iron Curtain opened its walls. Many American brethren ventured to enter the Iron Gate to “sow” the precious seed. In just a few months, we read of their success in those lands. What encouraging news it was for these faithful men and their worthy sacrifices for the cause of Christ!

Aside from the Iron Gate, the gospel has been sown in China among many Chinese people through the efforts of Jeffery Kingry and his family. After Jeff, many had joined them; they were, Dale and Marlene Smelser; Robert and Susan Small and their two cute little daughters; Ken Green; Garry Sandusky; Darrell Haub; Dan and Jeanie Clendening and many more; even this writer had a short opportunity in helping to sow the gospel in that place, particularly Hong Kong in 1991.

At present, the gospel efforts continue in China. Fred Newman and his family are in Taian, Shendong Province, China; Hong Kong, has Bob Small. Though Bob and his family stay in Cebu City, Philippines, but his labors mainly are in Hong Kong. The church in Hong Kong meets at #15 Hennesey Road, Wan Chai every Sunday morning.

In Cebu City, a new congregation was started by brother Bob Small in Lebangon District; it was a two-fold effort done by him to this effect.

Aside from these faithful men, many has been in and out of other countries, such as India, Africa, Japan and other nations and races. Brethren, this is responsibility demonstrated!

Responsibility Shared

Every gospel preacher going to a foreign land preaching the message of salvation cannot fulfill such mission with great success without the assistance of churches sending funds to their needs. Appeals of these worthy brethren ring far and wide, and responsible churches want the gospel preached to them.

In most cases, American churches send financial assistance to many foreign workers in many lands; including the Philippines. Many Filipino preachers are working on a “full-time” basis, having someone sharing their financial needs both in their family and on their evangelization efforts. To this effect, every native worker must devote all his time and efforts in the preaching field, and not to engage in any field or business. Only those who are not full-time workers have the right to seek secular work or engage in business.

Regarding a monthly support of a certain preacher, it is not good to have it in a standardization concept.

Some Americans who came to the Philippines in recent years, has categorically suggested a standardization of support to a level of $ 150 each preacher. This amount is not always enough to aid a preacher to a full-time basis. Many things must be considered to this matter: first, the place where that preacher was located; second, the number in the preacher’s family; third, the program of work a certain preacher is doing.

A $150 per month salary received by a preacher with 7 children and a wife living in a city, is not adequate. The amount is not even enough for a preacher in the province. Provincial preachers are categorized on three distinct levels: (1) those that are living on a 1st class municipalities; (2) those that live in 3rd class municipalities; and (3) those that are living in the barrio.

A certain preacher who was able to justify his expenses with the kinds of program of evangelism he is doing, must be given the attention by those with whom he may be in contact. A $500 a month salary for a native preacher who lives in a 1st class municipality and has a great program of work, is not even enough. Considering a preacher’s in-come is far beyond on any progress being enjoyed by all professionals around. While everybody works for his own progress to obtain a financial empire, gospel preachers’ income is for the progress of the Lord’s work! In short, all professionals’ income is coming in, preachers’ income is going out of their pockets! That is the big difference.

The more funds given to a worthy Filipino preacher, the more progress of his own gospel efforts, unless that preacher is corrupt. All these can be seen on the scope of work being done. From time to time, American churches must have first hand information on the where abouts of the man whom they support. I mean by that, each American church or individual, must know on a first hand basis Amen! of the work, the family and the progress of works done by those whom they are sending support. If they could not go, they should send someone to visit those whom they have fellowship with, not just depending on what the native preacher sends in his monthly report to them. The native preacher might be so hesitant to ask things through his letters, so there is a need that a first hand visit by someone to see the need. Brethren, this is responsibility shared.

Suggestion For Dealing with Some Problems

Problems are always a matter that exist as long as there are efforts done with sincerity. When such a problem exists among native brethren, Americans who have the knowledge on it must assist to resolve it to the best of their abilities and not to biasly side with those whom they trusted more. Their best stand is to be neutral and help those native brethren resolve their problems. When false reports reach Americans, each report must be given the priority to resolve and find the truth of the matter; there should be no time lost! When Americans do not know who is telling the truth on a certain matter, the best way to settle the problem is to talk to those U.S. churches who have made known the matter, or the source of the matter. They are the best source of unbiased statements. Brethren, this is another face of responsibility!

A Call to Responsibility

It is of common concept, that support to a preacher is only limited to the man whose health and talent is useful. When preachers gets older and their own health has deteriorated, financial support to them has also deteriorated and faster! Many cases can be cited, but everybody knows of those preachers in the past 50 years who has been retired to the wheelchair! Look to their financial capabilities. It is a pity to see these once valiant men of the gospel who has been deprived of their rights to be compensated with the assurance for their retirement.

While all professionals who devote their life to their own professions receive pensions after their retirements, gospel preachers do not! If gospel preachers were given the due respect of assistance during their old age, it would just be a responsibility of anyone as the old preacher has devoted his life to preaching.

Brethren, this is the aim of this article; our preachers who devoted all their time, efforts and life to the preaching of the gospel have the right to expect from those who fellowship with him in the past for any “retirement!” It is logical to grant those who spent their lives in the preaching field, that when time comes that their bodies can no longer avail to stand up preaching, that someone will help them sustain life. Above all, this is what the Lord so desires, for “We know love by this, that he laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoever has the world’s goods, and beholds his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him? Little children, let us not love with word or tongue, but in deed and truth.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 2, p. 22-23
January 20, 1994