What Is Wrong With the Church of Christ? (4)

By Larry Ray Hafley

Before we discuss specific slurs that some sling against the church of the Lord, we shall notice a few effects of the critics’ complaints. Evil men with evil motives unwittingly may benefit the cause of the Christ. How? First, they may lead us to silent introspection and reflection upon our own hearts course and direction (2 Cor. 13:5; 1 Thess. 5:21). This does not justify the evildoer, but it may help the friends of the Father to sharpen their focus against the foes of the faith. Second, their scathing, scurrilous complaints help us to identify them. A guerilla fighter is most effective when he works anonymously, out of sight. One cannot shoot at an enemy he cannot see. Their criticisms mark and stamp them; their camouflage is removed. We know where to train the cross hairs of our scope. We know where to aim (Rom. 16:17). Third, unfairness and injustice often stir the languid, lethargic soul. One who is placidly content may be aroused to zealous, vigorous action by the sting of unfair, unjust complaints. After Pearl Harbor, a Japanese official said, “I fear that we have only succeeded in arousing a sleeping giant.” He was right! Americans were incensed and infuriated by the “dastardly” sneak attack. Enlistments increase the ranks of the righteous when some are pricked and prodded by a sense of righteous indignation (Mk. 3:5). Fourth, they increase our dependence on God. Our enemies would like to wound and weaken us, and they do for a time, but with the apostle Paul we can boldly say:

If I must glory, I will glory in the things that concern my weakness. . . . Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Wherefore I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries. in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong (2 Cor. 11:30; 12:10ASV ). I can do all things in him that strengthened) me (Phil. 4:13).

David’s success against Goliath is an object lesson of these things. David was stung and stirred by Goliath’s insolent challenge (1 Sam. 17:26). Next, he trusted in God. He acknowledged Goliath’s physical superiority, noting his sword, spear and shield, “but I come to thee in the name of Jehovah of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied” (1 Sam. 17:45). So, today. We thank our adversaries for their adversity. They have helped us. “My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations. Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience” (Jas. 1:2, 3).

Despite the positive effects, there are, unfortunately, some negative effects. See the chart:

Whats Wrong with The Church of Christ?

Effects of Critics Complaints:

1. Belittles Truth  2 Peter 2:2

2. Heightens Error  Acts 13:44-46, 50

  • Error wins without having to answer a single argument (Acts 17: 2-10).
  • Opponents Emboldened

3. Disciples Discouraged

  • “Guilt Trip”
  • Ashamed of Truth (2 Timothy 1:8; Romans 1:16)
  • Neutralized = Quarantine

Critics will have to answer for these demoralizing, degenerating effects. Their murmurings and complainings are a both a source and an evidence of apostasy. Ten of the twelve spies in Numbers 13 were the cause of defeat and discouragement (Num. 14:1-4). Their words were also “an evident token of perdition” or destruction (Phil. 1:28). We neither gloat nor glory in these consequences.

Belittles Truth

Those who “speak great swelling words” against “the right ways of the Lord,” cause truth to be belittled and ridiculed. “But there arose false prophets also among the people, as among you also there shall be false teachers, who shall privily bring in destructive heresies. . . . And many shall follow their lascivious doings; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of ” (2 Pet. 2:1, 2). Both words and deeds may be detrimental (2 Sam. 12:14; 3 Jn. 10).

Critics and complainers cause damage with their unwise words. This is vividly demonstrated in the Old Testament (Num. 13:26-14:4). Korah, Dathan and Abiram “took men” and used them to murmur against Moses (Num. 16). Moses and Aaron, God’s appointed, anointed leaders were disdained and discredited as dishonorable men of arrogant ambition (Num. 16:3). These charges led to a denial of the Lord’s purposes and promises (Num. 16:13, 14). Thus, “the way of truth (was) evil spoken of.”

The same thing happened in the New Testament. The apostles were falsely accused by “false brethren” (Rom. 3:8; 2 Cor. 10:10). That the apostles were harmed and injured is not the main point. The real ruin, the true tragedy is that the truth of God was belittled in the eyes of men. Today, men may assault and assassinate the character of Christians. Again, this is not the central concern. It is the trampling and tarnishing of the truth that is the greatest travesty. Korah, Dathan and Abiram did not dream, perhaps, that their murmuring against Moses was actually “against the Lord” (Num. 16:11). Paul’s opponents apparently never realized that their persecutions against him were hindrances to the gospel’s power to save (1 Thess. 2:14-16).

Current critics and complainers cause similar calamity in the church. It is not the slander of men that matters. It is the belittling of the truth that is our greatest peril. We must beware lest we allow personal slights to become our focal point, our guiding star. In the final analysis, they are nothing; the truth is everything. Obviously, as Luke 15 and the entire book of 2 Corinthians show, a personal defense may have to be made in order to defend the truth itself, but one must not permit a carnal spirit of self preservation and selfish promotion to fuel his prosecution of error. When a child of God lets his own personal defense overshadow his stance as a sentry of truth, he has lost his effectiveness as a soldier in the kingdom of God.

Heightens Error

In Acts 13, Paul’s opposers contradicted and blasphemed; they denied and slandered. The result was that a great, logical, scriptural speech was declared “dead on arrival,” “null and void.” This was accomplished without the enemy having to answer a single argument! Throw dust; throw sand; start a riot. That way, error does not have to give an answer. It wins by default!

A similar episode occurred in Thessalonica. For three Saturdays, Paul “reasoned (d i scussed, d isputed) with them out of the Scriptures” (Acts 17:2,3). He carefully and clearly “proved and explained” his doctrine (see NASB). But it is easier to take “certain lewd men of the baser sort” and precipitate confusion with an angry mob than it is to provide reasoned argumentation. Again, without firing a shot, error succeeded in driving Paul away under cover of darkness (Acts 17:2-10)

By stirring up strife, by kindling contention, error is enhanced and encouraged. Attack the elders as being dictatorial, high-handed autocrats who make decisions “without consulting anyone” (cf. Num. 16:3). Charge the preacher with manifesting a rude, crude, boorish manner. Say that he is “driving people away” with his “dogmatic” demeanor. As the rebels in Numbers 16 and Acts 13 and 17 did, enlist men who will parrot the charges. In this way, error will not have to answer a single argument; it will not have to defend a position, or a doctrine. “Forbid them that would” call for study and open debate and “cast them out of the church” (3 In. 9, 10). Destroy the eldership, cause disarray, fire the preacher or force him out “for the good of everyone concerned,” but by all means get rid of him and the elders. My brethren, this is the way error works. It has not changed since Numbers 16 and Acts 17. Only the names and faces are different. The effect is the same.

Disciples Discouraged

Moses was dismayed and discouraged by the complaints of carping critics. Paul was “troubled . . . perplexed . . . cast down” to the extent that he “despaired even of life” (2 Cor. 1:8-11; 4:8,9). Error has a debilitating design and effect. It seeks to wear down the advocates of truth. Disciples are made to feel guilty. They begin to wonder, “Lord, is it I?” They are made to question and doubt themselves and their faith. “Maybe it is me; maybe it is my fault. Maybe the elders are a little too insensitive to these good brethren. Maybe the preacher is a little too hard; maybe he could manifest a better spirit when he preaches; maybe he is driving people away. Maybe he should move. Not because I want him to, and certainly not because he does not preach the truth, because he does preach the truth, but maybe a change would be better for everyone and would stop all the confusion that exists here.”

It is all part of the overall plan. Error will rule or ruin. It will not allow the appointing of men who hold fast the faithful word and who are able and willing to convict those who teach error (Tit. 1:9-13). Thus, when error ousts its present opposition, it will be in a much stronger position. Truth will be weakened while error is emboldened. The next elders and preacher will be of their kind and of their mind. It is a sinister plan that is being hatched. The unwary will be overtaken before they realize what has happened. Some, at ease in Zion, will never know and will never care.

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ” (Rom. 1:16). “Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord” (2 Tim. 1:8). Complainers will cause one to become ashamed of the gospel and of the way of truth. They will try to make the faithful feel as though they ought to offer a retraction and an apology for “the hard sayings” of the gospel. Beware of such men. Beware of their spirit.

Critics of the word of the cross seek to neutralize it. If they can cause the church to develop a sense of shame and embarrassment for the fundamentals of the faith (“one Lord, one faith, one baptism”), they can quarantine the truth. Truth is stifled when it is watered down and soft-pedaled. When a church becomes ashamed of the gospel, it will go into a shell like a tortoise. The gospel will be neutralized. The faith will be quarantined. Heavenly hosts will hang their heads in horror. The imps of impiety will rejoice.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 23, p. 8-10
December 2, 1993

Our Redeemer

By Olen Holderby

Isaiah 59:20 predicts, “And the redeemer shall come to Zion”; however, the word “redeemer” is not found in the New Testament, though the idea is there. Paul tells us that the Lord “gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity” (Tit. 2;14). The one who redeems would certainly be a redeemer. One who pays the price of redemption would, also, be called a redeemer; and Peter tells us that this is what Christ did (1 Pet. 18-19). But do we really comprehend these terms and their implications?

Old Testament Background

We introduce, just here, three Hebrew words which have to do with our subject:

1. Padah  “Buy (off), ransom, redeem” (verb).

2. Gaol  To “act as kinsman, redeem” (verb).

3. Gael  Sometimes used to refer to the one doing the redeeming, thus “redeemer” (noun).

Both padah and goal are used to suggest the idea of “release by the payment of a price,” or “buy back” (ISBE, 4:61). A good understanding of these Hebrew words, in their Old Testament setting, can be highly beneficial.

Redemption of the “first-born.” “First-born” males of both man and beast were to belong to the Lord, set apart to his service (Exod. 13:2,12). This was alluded to in Luke 2:23, at the birth of Jesus. “First-born” clean animals were to be sacrificed on the altar, to the Lord; but “first-born” unclean animals could not be sacrificed. They had to be redeemed by clean animals which could be sacrificed (Exod. 13:13). Such an animal, not redeemed, must die; it was rendered of no use to its owner. The animals used to redeem the unclean animal would be the redemption price to be paid.

“First-born” male children could not be sacrificed; but were to be redeemed (Num. 18:15ff). “Five shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary,” was the redemption price for each such male child. This same redemtpion price is used in reference to the Levites (Num. 3:44-51); and this was given to the priests.

Please notice that in each case a redemption price was to be paid; and some one had to pay that price! Whoever paid that price could be referred to as a redeemer.

Redemption of land: First, we should remember that they were not to sell the land in perpetuity; but, might be forced to sell because of poverty (Lev. 25:33). There were three ways in which the land might be redeemed: (1) A kinsman might redeem it (Lev. 25:23ff; Ruth 2:20; 3:9,12,130; 4:1ff). This kinsman would be called the gael (the one paying the price), the redeemer, (2) The seller himself, could redeem his land if he became able to do so, (3) If the first two options were not used, the land remained with the buyer until Jubilee (end of 50 years); then, it would return to its original owner (Lev. 25:10,28). In each of these cases there was a price to pay and some one had to pay that price; that price payer would be a redeemer.

Redemption of dwellings: Houses within city walls were to be redeemed within one year of the date of sale. If outside the city walls, it could be redeemed at any time. “Jubilee” would return them to their original owners. We have the same reasoning here as with the “first-born” and with lands (Lev. 25).

All this shows at least three things: (1) “Redemption” refers to the recovery of persons or things, (2) A redemption price was necessary for this recovery, and (3) An intermediary (gad) acted to secure the recovery or redemption.

Applied to God’s Dealings With Israel

Both padah and goal are used to refer to salvation wrought by God for Israel. The Lord, as the kinsman practicing the gaol, is seen in Exodus 6:6; 15:13; while he is seen in Deuteronomy 7:8 as paying the ransom, buying them off (padah) from under Pharaoh. Many passages could be cited, showing Israel being redeemed from various calamities, but deliverance from Egyptian bondage is the central theme. “Redemption in the Old Testament is not to be thought of as merely deliverance; it also reflects very pointedly on the “mode” of deliverance  more inclusive than what we, today, may think.

Though space will not permit us to discuss it, Galatians 3:24, properly viewed, reflects this same thought. They simply could not effect redemption for themselves; thus, some one had to make arrangements, pay the price, for their redemption.

Gael is often applied to the Lord in the Old Testament (see Job 19:25; Ps. 19:14; Isa. 41:14; Jer. 50:34, etc.). With this, the idea of redemption is carried to its highest level-God speaks of himself as their “kinsman,” arranging their redemption, and paying the ransom price. However, we must not ever forget that Israel had certain conditions to be met to show their acceptance and their appreciation of the offered redemption.

Out of this background comes at least two things: (1) Moses’ instructions to the Jews concerning the redemption of the “first-born,” land, and houses (we have already discussed these). (2) Old Testament prophecy of a future Redeemer (Isa. 59:20; Rom. 11:26). Let number two register well with us!

Redemption In the New Testament

The New Testament uses several Greek words referring to redemption, reflecting the same meanings as their Hebrew counter-parts.

We have already noticed that Christ gave himself as a ransom for our iniquities; he substituted himself for the price which we were “suppose” to pay (Tit. 2:14). We have, also, noticed Peter’s view of the same thought (1 Pet. 1:18-19). In our deep poverty we could not redeem our-selves; thus, Christ as our kinsman, steps forward and pays the price in our stead. Paul expresses agreement with Peter in both Ephesians 1:7 and Romans 3:24-26. “Ye are bought with a price,” says Paul (1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23). The price is not identified in these verses, but there can be no doubt, “for thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood” (Rev. 5:9).

“Redemption” is redemption from sin, from all phases of the bondage to which sin confines us. We are in the power of the archenemy of God, Satan; but, our eyes can be opened, we can be turned from the power of Satan unto God, and receive the forgiveness of our sins (Acts 26:18).

Now, do we get the picture? Christ is united as both the padah and gaal, recovering us from sin, by playing the role of our “kinsman” (gael), offering himself  as the intermediary  securing redemption for us (Heb. 2:14-18; Phil. 2:6-8). We could not do it for ourselves; we were lost and doomed to eternal torment. Our kinsman steps forward and obtains eternal redemption for us (Heb. 9:12). True, as Israel of old, we have conditions to be met to show our acceptance and our appreciation of the offered redemption. Thanks to God, Christ is the padah. The gaol, the gael all, for us!

Ought we not, then, to be eternally grateful, and ever happy to do his bidding? All else is nothing (Heb. 12:1-2).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 22 p. 14-15
November 18, 1993

Why Be A Soul Winner?

By Ken Cooper

The greatest need in the church today is not so much more preachers, elders, deacons, meeting houses or better Bible classes, etc. True, these are all needed, but one of the greatest needs in the Lord’s church is for more members to be personal evangelists. When we compare our efforts today with the successful efforts of the church of the first century (Acts 8.4;.17:6; Col. 1:23), we see that there is definitely something lacking. The great commission is one of the most familiar teachings of Jesus and yet, it is one of the mast neglected It says “go ye” but when we apply it to ourselves, it says, “go me” Possibly one reason why Christians are not going is due to indifference and/or a lack of motivation to be soul winners. That indifference can be removed by going to the Bible and there learn why every Christ to be a soul winner.

1. Christ n as a soul winner, He was always willing and ready to teach multitudes (Matt.S-7),oranindividaluwaJn.3:1-13:4:1 26),I3e r came to save sinners and his aim was always the same, that is to challenge every individual to obey God’s will. As Christians (which means Christ-like) we must strive to imitate the Lord’s example in seeking the lost.

2. Early Christians were soul winners. They were to In Jerusalem preaching the gospel to every creature in their generation. Even persecution did not keep them from their task for they taught “daily … in every house” (Acts 5:42) and “went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:1-4). The Christians of the first century took the great commission seriously. They understood what the Lord cant when he said “go.” “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mk.16:15).They did go, and so must we.

3. The Scriptures reveal that every Christian has a personal responsibility to seek the lost. By reading Matthew 28:18-20; 2 Timothy 2:2 and I Peter 3:15 we learn that every. Christian is implicated in the great commission. Each child of God is responsible m do his part. In fact, individual responsibility is emphasized throughout the New Testament; Notice what “many of the brethren” did in Philippians 1:14; and to whom Jude 3 (“earnestly contend for the faith’) was written (“to them that are sanctified.” v. I). Every Christian must shoulder his responsibility. If a congregation has 100 members, it should have 100 personal evangelists. Therefore, it is urgent that every Christian get involved and seeking the lost now, wherever they are or whatever they are doing. We can do what the Lord wants us to do!

4. Soul winning is good for the soul winner. It has been stated that “the saved are saved to save others!” Truly, every Christian needs to be faithful (in.15.1-5; Matt. 25: 14-46), but seeking the lost also pays great dividends in this life. Personal evangelism promotes consecration, dedication, faithfulness, prayer, more Bible study, as well as a sense of contributing to the cause of Christ. Thus, soul winning is a spiraling type of f encouragement which leads to eternal happiness.

Being a soul winner is important because it produces results. It helps every individual Christian as well as the local church to go, grow and glow for Christ. You can be a soul winner for Jesus Why not start today?

Guardian of Truth, XXXVII, No. 23, p. 4
December 2, 1993

Spanking and the Inspiration of the Scriptures

By Kyle Pope

A recent program I watched on television focused its attention on the question of how parents should raise their children. The program began by looking at the fact that throughout history parents have held corporal punishment (spanking, whipping, etc.) to be an acceptable form of discipline. The program then pointed out that the Bible itself teaches physical punishment of children as a part of training them. The question was then asked (to the effect) “Can the Bible, history and tradition all be wrong?” The remainder of the program looked at the views of “experts” that answered this question in no uncertain terms  “Yes, spanking children is wrong!”

This may seem like a rather tame statement at first, but I’m afraid that as Christians we may not realize what we are conceding if we either: (I) accept this view to be true or, (2) allow it to go unchallenged. What we say is that God is wrong! He does not understand human nature and childhood development! He has instructed what is actually destructive to such development! And thus his admonitions must not be heeded on this subject, That may sound rather strong but I believe that is exactly what such a concession must confess.

What we must understand first are the claims of scripture. It does not purport to be man’s commentary on God’s will but rather the mind of God revealed to man directly. Thus 2 Peter 1:20,21 claims … No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (NKJV). Further, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 claims “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (NIV). So it is clear that the claim is that Scripture is God’s word. One can either accept that or not, but to be true to scripture one must admit at least what the Bible claims about itself!

So then, what are the claims of scripture about the concept of corporal punishment? (1) It is commanded by God  “Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die” (Prov. 23:13, NKJV). (2) It is constructive to a child “Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction will drive it far from him” (Prov. 22:15).

It can be a demonstration of love “He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly” (Prov. 13:24). It can lead to wisdom and (5) It is shameful to neglect it “The rod and reproof giveth wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother” (Prov. 29:15). (6) It must not be destructive to the child  “Chasten your son while there is hope, and do not set your heart on his destruction” (Prov. 19:18). (7) It can benefit a child spiritually “You shall beat him with a rod and deliver his soul from hell [that is Sheol]” (Prov. 29:17). (9) It is a characteristic of God’s dealings with man  “For whom the Lord loves he chastens, and scourges every son whom he receives” (Heb. 12:6).(10)

Those without it are treated as illegitimate children  “But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons” (Heb. 12:9). (11) Though intended to be unpleasant it can produce righteous behavior “Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but grievous; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it” (Heb. 12:11).

All of this makes it abundantly clear that scripture teaches there is a place for the physical discipline of children in proper parenting. That is not to sanction all that is done in the name of discipline. Nor does teach that abuse is to be treated lightly. But simply that if we claim to accept the Bible as God’s word we must accept with it what it teaches us about how to raise our children. This calls on us to place great confidence in the authority of scripture and sometimes to reject the notions of the so-called “experts.”

But what about abuse? Our generation has seen examples of perhaps the most horrifying treatment of children imaginable. Sometimes in the name of discipline and sometimes out of some perverse pleasure in the inflicting of pain children have been brutalized. As Christians we must stand against this! There is a difference between the moderate application of discomfort by loving parents and the enduring scars of brutality inflicted by disturbed and ungodly souls!

Perhaps the following questions would be good to ask ourselves the next time we discipline our children:

Why are we spanking them? (Simply out of anger or in an attempt to shape their behavior?)

What do we want them to learn from this? (Do we have a conscious objective?)

Have we given plenty of positive reinforcement to balance things? (Do they see our love for them?)

Do they understand our expectations of them? (Have we talked with them enough?)

I pray that godly mothers and fathers who love the Lord will boldly and courageously stand up for the unfailing truth of Gods word. At stake is not only our belief in the inspiration of scripture but our children themselves!

 Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 23, p.1
December 2, 1993