Truth Magazine

By Donnie V. Rader

This special issue of Guardian of Truth is about gospel meetings. In some places it seems that meetings have become a mere custom or routine. It’s time that we stop and think about why we are having a meeting and what we can do to improve on it. Are we having this meeting because it is that time of the year to have another meeting or do we have a real purpose in mind? What is our goal during the week? Are we trying to reach the lost in the community or work on building up those who are Christians?

I am delighted to see some churches taking more interest in the purpose and direction of the meeting. This year I have had more churches than ever before request a specific direction (some even selecting which sermons for a particular night) for the meeting.

Another purpose for this special issue is to emphasize that the day of gospel meetings is not over. A pessimistic attitude, that says that it is, will defeat the Lord’s work. When the gospel is preached, God is glorified and good is accomplished. We may go through cycles of how interested people are in coming to hear God’s word. We must, through each cycle, be there preaching the truth to those who are there. In so doing we edify Christians and prepare them to convert their neighbors. We also help prevent apostasy.

Meetings are good in that the local church has an opportunity to hear different preachers. Preachers have different styles, approaches and points of emphasis. Some visiting preachers may be able to accomplish with some “in some places it seems that meetings have become a mere custom or routine. It’s dine that we stop and think about why we are having a meeting and what we can do to improve on it” what the local man has been unable to do. It also helps them to hear the same principles from another man which serves to reinforce the local man’s work.

There is no doubt that gospel meetings have changed some over the years. While working on this special I have asked a few older preachers how meetings have changed since the day they started holding meetings. Some said that brethren don’t attend meetings in other places like they used to. One brother said that brethren used to drive 75 miles to attend meetings, but now many will not drive across town to encourage others in their efforts. Some of the preachers said that the preaching has changed. Now them is little preaching on hell, denominationalism and Bible authority. Yet those were the subjects in days gone by. I have a sermon on hell that I frequently preach in meetings. I generally get a reaction from several like this: “You don’t hear that kind of preaching much anymore.” I remember that preachers used to always have one sermon on hell in about every meeting. But, it has been years since I’ve heard a sermon like that. Brethren, it’s time to think about what we are preaching!

This special covers many aspects of gospel meetings. The pages to follow touch on the history of meetings, their purpose, the preacher, the local church, the singing, advertisement, the preacher’s pay and other things that will help improve our meetings.

If we can cause a few churches and preachers to evaluate how meetings can be improved, our goal will be accomplished.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 16, p. 1
August 19, 1993

By Carl McMurray

Our mouth has spoken freely to you, 0 Corinthians, our heart is opened wide. You are not restrained by us, but you are restrained in your own affections. Now in a like exchange  I speak as to children  open wide to us also (2 Cor. 6:11-13).

Paul reminded the Corinthians in this passage that he had been completely open with them in heart and speech. He had shared with them commendation, rebuke, love, and tears. There was a problem, however, in that some in Corinth were being led to attack the apostle. Not being willing to accept correction and desirous of Paul’s authority as an apostle, it seems a few were leading the congregation to question, doubt, and otherwise be suspicious of the apostle. The natural result of this action, however, was to cause barrier walls to be erected between the inspired teacher and his students. The apostle points out that although he was not “restraining” them, they were still very much being restrained by themselves. They were holding back their true and real affections in this matter, and Paul encourages them to let go and open up their hearts. The things he had taught them and the things he was still teaching them had to do with love, openness, and fellowship. No part of gospel truth practiced or taught openly can cause harm to man. It is only those motivated by selfishness or coveting power and preeminence who desire walls to go up, things to be done in secret, and hearts to be closed against their fellow man.

Isn’t that the way it is? There seems to be no end to the amount of love that the human heart can hold. We are not limited to just loving one, but are able, year after year, to add to the list of “loved ones.” One’s heart never seems to “fill up” so that we must say, “I just can’t love one more.” On the other hand, just a little hatred or envy seems to completely fill us. There is suddenly no more room in the heart when jealousy moves in. Love is brought to a halt and even past love is squeezed and damaged by this evil influence. The clear fact seems to be that God did not design the human heart to carry evil suspicions, doubt, motive judging and coveting. They don’t fit well and when we accept that load from Satan, it is an uncomfortable one that is borne with much sorrow.

We need to listen to the apostle’s advice to Corinth. We often need to quit “restraining” (tying up, holding back?) ourselves with the burden of a bad attitude or selfish motives. We need to “open wide” our hearts and let these sinful burdens fall away. We must learn to accept and deal with one another in an open and loving fashion  as Paul said he had done with Corinth.

When you appreciate the activities or attitude of a brother or sister, go tell them so  don’t be “restrained.” If you love one another, say so. Likewise, if there is a problem, go talk to that Christian and deal with it. Let’s leave the “mind games” and “rule keeping” to the politicians and lawyers. Let’s “open wide” our hearts and talk to one another instead of about one another. When we learn this principle of doing things openly and not looking for hidden motives, great things are in store for us. We will all be profited by being able to accept correction better. Parents and Bible class teachers will work together for the benefit of the child rather than one fearing the reaction of the other. Preachers and congregations will work together as a team instead of one trying to control the other. Elders will come out from behind closed doors and quit making decisions for the congregation instead of “leading” the group to make decisions for themselves. And the list goes on and on.

Nothing but good can come from a gospel of openness and love. Let us not wait until trouble arises as in Corinth and we have to be told this in correction. It is Satan that wants us all tied up and burdened. The Lord would set us free through truthful behavior with one another. Let’s open our hearts and be not restrained.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 15, p. 19-20
August 5, 1993

By Donald P. Ames

Years ago, brother Homer Hailey used to say that if you got into a study with a Jehovah’s Witness, just focus in on the plan of salvation  if we could not agree on this, the rest did not matter anyway. While there is certainly a lot to differ with them on (i.e. the deity of Christ, the nature of the soul, the 144,000, the role of government, the eternal nature of hell, the future of this planet, the kingdom of God, blood transfusions, the return of Christ, the inspiration of The Watchtower, etc.), the older I get, the more I see the wisdom in what he had to say. Why study all these complicated subjects if we can not even agree of what one must do to be saved? Also, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have a pre-schooled program and a string of arguments ready to discuss these subjects. However, off their pre-programmed arguments, they’re like a fish out of water  they do not know where to go or how to study from the word of God. A brief examination of their reasoning on baptism is certainly evidence of this.

If you ask a Jehovah’s Witness what one must do to be saved, he can not give you a direct answer. He simple does not know. Somewhere along the line, you just slide over the line from being lost to being saved; and where and how, he cannot explain. When you begin to study such passages as Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3-7; 1 Peter 3:21, etc. with him, he will quickly agree with you that baptism is essential to salvation and that is what he believes and teaches. Yet, in the very next breath, he will tell you God is more interested in the incentives of the heart than in the act itself (see Acts 10:1-2; Rom. 10:1-3 to reply to this reasoning). The bottom line is: He does not know what he believes on this subject!

The truth is that their publications teach exactly what the Baptists teach on baptism (Jehovah’s Witnesses denials notwithstanding). They do believe baptism is “essential” for salvation, but not for the remission of sins! To them, it is the same as a faithful Christian attending church or partaking of the Lord’s supper. A Christian must do these things to be saved (and faithful), but the act itself has nothing to do with forgiveness and becoming a Christian. But, a Jehovah’s Witness will openly deny that this is what he believes! He only knows that he does believe baptism is “essential” to be saved  but how is it “essential”? That is the question!

To clarify their real teaching on this subject, let us note a few statements from their own publications. In The Truth That leads to Eternal Life, they state: “When love for God moves you so that you want to do his will, then it is proper that you go to him in prayer. . . . It is appropriate that you tell Jehovah that you want to belong to him and that you want to do his will. . . After you have made your dedication to Jehovah to do his will, he will expect you to keep it. . . . What, then does Christian baptism signify? It is not a washing away of one’s sins, because cleansing from sin comes only through faith in Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:7). Rather, it is a public demonstration, testifying that one has made a solemn dedication to Jehovah God and is presenting himself to do his will. . . . If you have made up your mind to serve Jehovah and want to be baptized, then make this known to the overseer of the congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses with which you are associated. He will gladly assist you without any charge for the baptism” (pp. 182-194, emp. mine  DPA). Again, in New Creation, they state: “The views of the `Disciples,’ otherwise calling themselves “Christians’ … is that baptism (immersion water) is for the remission of sins. We cannot accept this to be a correct view of baptism; to us it is neither scriptural nor reasonable. We cannot believe that the word has made the eternal welfare of our race dependent upon their knowledge of, and obedience to, any such institution” (p. 428, emp. mine  DPA).

Certainly that ought to be adequate to clarify their position, but apparently they are still having problems explaining what they believe on it. In The Watchtower magazine (4-1-93), they carried an article entitled: “Baptize!” they ask: “Why did Jesus require that his disciples be baptized? Well, it was a fitting symbol of their whole-hearted dedication to God …. Are you one who has been associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses for some time? Perhaps you have already made the necessary changes in your life in accordance with Bible principles but have not taken the steps of dedication and baptism. .. . There are many people who have taken in an accurate knowledge of the Bible but have not yet fully availed themselves of God’s provision for salvation by being baptized…. A person who truly has such love and wants a special relationship with Jehovah God would not hold back from freely dedicating his life to him. Baptism is but an outward symbol of that dedication” (pp. 5-7, emp. mine  DPA).

Then, in an attempt to explain baptism away and get around the passages that teach it is essential, they state: “The Scriptures do not support the widely held view that baptism is a sacrament, that is, a religious ceremony imparting meritgrace, holiness, or spiritual benefit  to the one baptized… . Moreover, according to the Scriptures, re-mission of sins comes only through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ” (emphasis mine, DPA). This supposedly explains away such passages as Matthew 28:19. They then turn to Jesus and argue that baptism could have nothing to do with the remission of sins, because Jesus himself was baptized, yet he had no sin. Acts 22:16 is explained away with the statement `by `calling upon his name’ in faith – Hebrews 9:22, 1 John 1:7.” I wonder what had moved Saul to such repentance prior to Ananias even coming to him? 1 Peter 3:21 is explained away by stating, Noah “showing full faith in God built the ark for the preservation of his family (Heb. 11:7). Similarly, by exercising faith in Jehovah God… people today can be saved from this present wicked world. They must also act on that faith. By repenting of sins, turning around from a wrong course, and making an unreserved dedication to Jehovah God in prayer, the request is made to God for a good conscience” (all emp. mineDPA). Note how they completely skip over the mention of “water” and talk instead about the ark as the means God used “by faith” to save Noah and his family.

No, a J.W. does not believe baptism has a thing to do with one being saved (i.e.: forgiven of his sins)it is only “essential” as an act of dedication, showing we are already saved and want to do God’s will. But, a J.W. will argue the point with you, and when finally forced to see their own statements in their own publications, will then turn around and argue one can be saved before and without baptism! Again, if we cannot agree on the subject of salvation, what difference do all those other doctrines make? If one is going to be lost for not obeying God’s will to get rid of his sins, the rest doesn’t matter! And if baptism is essential, then The Watchtower and their publications have published falsehood, and if that is so, they are not inspired! This, in turn, makes all the rest of their teachings suspect as well.

Jehovah’s Witnesses need to see these points, then challenged whether they will continue to follow teachers who are not teaching the truth of God’s word on so vital a subject. If they will teach error of one point, can they not also be in error in these others points as well? At least one point has been established though, The Watchtower can no longer be held up as the infallible interpreter of the word of God!

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 15, p. 20-21
August 5, 1993

By Paul Casebolt

The apostle Paul speaks of those who would change the glory of God into an image, the truth into a lie, and the natural use of men and women “into that which is against nature” (Rom. 1:23-27).

In order to place the all-to-common sin of homosexuality between women and men in perspective, maybe we need to notice the practice in the above context. We surely cannot learn the truth from modern societys usage of the term “gay,” and similar efforts to accord a degree of respectability to the vile behavior which affects even the church of the Lord.

Where the King James translation uses the word “change(ed)” in all three of the verses mentioned, the ASV uses “exchanged” (v. 25), or ” changed . . . for” (v. 23). The idea is that we can no more “change” the ways and the truth of God into something else than a leopard can change its spots (Jer. 13:23-25). But, we can exchange, or trade, one doctrine or practice for another. Even the King James text conveys this idea, as expressed perfectly in v. 26.

“God Into An Image”

Man cannot actually change the glory of the uncorruptible God into graven images, but he tries. Really, all he does is exchange “the fountain of living waters” for “broken cisterns, that can hold no water” (Jer. 2:13).

“Men With Men”

When I said that the practice of homosexuality, including lesbianism, affects the church of the Lord, I did not mean just in the sense that any worldly practice may adversely affect those who have been called out of the world. Like fornication was “named” among Gods people at Corinth, so illicit sexual relations between men and men, and women and women have disrupted the unity of peace of congregations, and families within those congregations.

The claim that homosexual activity is not on the increase, but has just” come out of the closet” will not hold up. While the more liberal attitude of society may encourage some to be more open, even brazen, with such behavior, the church as a whole still does not encourage homosexuals to come out into the open. Still, the church continues to be affected by this ungodly practice which precip8itated the destruction of Sodom an Gomorrah. Some factor, or a combination of factors, is contributing to the unnatural practice of homosexuality.

The Catholic church has suffered much adverse publicity because of homosexual activity between priests, and between priests and male parishioners, including young boys. There is no question but that the unnatural attempt at celibacy, or the “forbidding to may,” contributes to the problem of homosexuality in the Catholic Church.

The natural rule is for male and female to satisfy their sexual needs in the marriage relationship (Gen 2:18; 1 Cor. 7:2-5). If God had intended for men to be homosexuals, he would have given Adam a man instead of a woman. Forbidding to marry is a mark of apostasy, and will contribute to fornication and homosexual conduct (1 Tim. 4:1-6).

Brethren, while I do not profess to be an expert on the subject, I think I can see some customs which may contribute to the unnatural relations of men with men, and women with women.

Some women have tried their best to look, dress, talk, and act like a man. Some flaunt their domineering, independent attitude, and then wonder why men have lost respect for femininity and womanhood. Why should a man desire a woman who has exchanged her female characteristics for those of a male, when he can have a real man, and not some artificial hybrid?

Conversely, if men are going to be effeminate (1 Cor. 6:9), why should a woman settle for a half-breed when she can have the real thing? I can sympathize with young people of today who have to first decide whether a prospective mate is male or female, then decide if they have enough of those qualities peculiar to either sex to make the effort of marriage worthwhile. A woman or man regarded as purely a sex symbol is not conducive to a good marriage relationship, but neither is a man or woman who tries to usurp the role of the other going to accomplish much in the way of meaningful relations. Men and women have sought fulfillment and satisfaction outside of God’s divide order so long that the term “meaningful relation” doesn’t mean a thing.

“Who Did Sin?”

The psychiatrists profess to have an explanation for every facet of man’s conduct, but I believe that there are situations which defy interpretation or solution. The disciples thought that the blind man’s condition could be traced to some definite cause visible to the human eye or mind, but Jesus neutralized their theory (Jn. 9:1-3).

Why some people exchange the truth of God for a lie, the true God for an idol, or the natural use of a man or woman for something else, may not always be a discernible. But the sinfulness of such acts is no less sinful, just because men and women do those things, or “have plea-sure in them that do them” (Rom. 1:32).

Even as the blind man said “one thing I know,” so we can know that “evil communications corrupt good manners (morals, ASV)”; sin begins in lust and ends in death; we are to “abstain from all appearance of evil”; and, when caught up in temptation, we are to find the way of escape and “flee” (1 Cor. 15:33; Jas. 1:13-15; 1 Thess. 5:22; 1 Cor. 10:13, 14).

By following this formula, it may be that we can keep God from giving us up to things which are worthy of death.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 15, p. 21-22
August 5, 1993