Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

I have before me an article by Cal Thomas, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times Syndicate, printed in the Akron Beacon Journal (11-16-92). Thomas advised the “religious right” to leave politics. He reported that Jerry Falwell was being inundated with requests to crank up the Moral Majority again. Thomas’ opinion is this: “if the objective is to change government policy and . . . return America to its spiritual and moral roots, the approach is backwards.” Why?

The reasons he gives are true, but disturbing. He said, “Such an effort cannot work because we now live in what some theologians call a ‘post-Christian culture.’ This means that the old norms are no longer accepted by the majority. “The terminology is even frightening! “Post-Christian”? The majority used to hold a Christian standard of morality. This meant that drunkenness, divorce for any cause, lying, stealing, murder, etc., were regarded as sinful. I can recall, as a boy, how the entire religious community where I was raised stood opposed to sins like these. Are we living in a “post-Christian culture”? Are the days of standing against these sins – because we are Christians – gone forever? Is all of this a relic of the past? If so, what happened? How did it happen?

Thomas wrote, “The majority no longer accepts principles from the Old and New Testaments that once undergirded law, government, human relationships and social policy.” Yes, sadly, this is true. Government, in writing law, no longer is interested in the revelation of God’s mind found in the Bible. They not only do not care what the Bible says, they deliberately enact laws which oppose what the Bible says. There are no better illustrations of this than the legalization of abortion and the laws demanding acceptance of homosexuality as nothing more than an alternate lifestyle. Legislators and judges could not care less what God has said on these questions. The majority of people want to establish any kind of human relationship they please, and they will not tolerate anyone who says they have no right to live like that. They want sanctioned homosexual and lesbian unions, and they want to live together without complying with marriage laws, without being condemned for such. Therefore, they will demand a change of social policy and position which will permit them to do as they please. One secular author recently suggested that we take “In God We Trust” off our money and inscribe, instead, “Anything Goes.” Those who were raised in a “Christian culture” can scarcely imagine what people are doing, and how their peers approve of that conduct.

Thomas said, “To appeal to this majority with the language and values of the past is to invite rejection even ridicule.” We certainly do not need anyone to testify to the truth of that! We just completed electing a new president whose moral values and conduct were under scrutiny, only to learn “that character is a non-issue where the President of the United States is concerned.” To the majority, it no longer makes any difference what a person has done in the past. He can still be elected to the highest office in the land. And, one would suspect, that it makes no difference what he might do in the future, so long as it does not cost the majority any money. During the election an appeal was made to the “Christian culture” about right and wrong, and to a recognition of “family values” as factors in the decision making process of the election. Thomas was right, this appeal was not only rejected, it was ridiculed! This was a hard lesson for religion to learn, but its about time we learned it.

Is the solution to this problem the re-birth of the Moral Majority? I agree with Thomas when he said, “No!” He suggested three things that must be done if we are to change things in America. I only partially agree with some of these things, but he is right on the mark in some instances.

1. He advised religious conservatives to separate their children from the failed public school system which has been invaded and captured by what he called “an alien philosophy.” Our schools have become “hothouses in which young seedlings are converted into towering, liberal oaks.” He advised that conservatives establish their own educational system which will teach their children that there is a difference between right and wrong. There might be some validity to this suggestion.

2. On this point I agree with him whole-heartedly. He said, “Preachers need to get back to their primary mission, which is to build their members spiritually and morally and to attract new members to a life, a cause and a kingdom not of this world.” For too long religion, even some in churches of Christ, has been interested in nothing more than a “social gospel” appeal. Feed them and entertain them, and that will be enough, or so it was thought. Several generations have now been raised on this spiritual “nothingness” and they no longer know what is right or wrong, and really do not care. Thomas said, “It is the layperson, properly committed and properly taught, who has the real power to bring real change.” He is totally right here! You cannot legislate morality. You must teach it. It must be learned and incorporated into the lives of every family. Then, and only then, can we change the direction in which our country is going. No vote will accomplish this, and we are dreaming an empty dream if we think it will. I find it sad that a newspaper columnist knows more about the mission of religion than so-called “religious leaders” know. Don’t you feel that way too?

3. Because of the backlash to the position on abortion of the “religious right,” Thomas said that “conservatives need to reposition themselves and be primarily known by what they are for, not what they oppose.” He then proceeded to extol the virtues of the “positive message” which we are hearing so much about, even in the church. I do not understand why we must “eliminate the negative” from our teaching in order to establish a proper stance for our society. This “either-or mentality” that is taking over religion is ignoring biblical reality. God not only told us what to do, he had a great deal to say about what we are not to do! Consider the Ten Commandments. They were both positive and negative in their approach. The same thing is true about the gospel. Saint and sinner need to affirm what God said we ought to be, and they need to tell us what he prohibits us doing. Only when people learn the whole story will they start living like God wants them to live – you know, like they used to live before we abandoned biblical principles in America.

We can affect a radical change in our country if we will get back to the Bible, God’s statement about how he wants us to live. We must teach it and we must live it. If we will do this, we will change “politics as usual” and this will change American life and lifestyles.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 24, pp. 742-743
December 17, 1992

By Joe R. Price

Nobody I know likes rotten fruit. There is nothing appealing about it. It stinks and is slimy, and it attracts flies and other unsightly insects and molds. The scavengers will eat it if they can get to it, and maybe the hogs. But have you ever wondered how rotten spiritual fruit must look to God?

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control; against such there is no law” (Gal. 5:22-23). Christians should be bearing fruit, and that fruit should not turn rotten. Think about some of the properties of fruit which should be present in our lives.

First, we often call fruit “produce.” It is a product of nature and nurturing. Likewise, the “fruit of the Spirit” is produced as one is “led by the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16,18,25). We are to live by the direction of the Spirit-inspired gospel – “the faith” he revealed (Gal. 3:2; 1: 11,23). The only way we can bear spiritual fruit is to abide in Christ (Jn. 15:1-5), and that means abiding in his word (Jn. 8:31-32). Is fruit being produced in our lives through our obedience to the gospel of Christ? Or, has the fruit rotted through negligence and disobedience?

Secondly, just as fruit identifies its plant, the fruit of our life identifies to whom we belong. Jesus said that bearing much fruit (by abiding in him) shows that we are his disciples (Jn. 15:8). Bearing the fruit of the Spirit marks us as belonging to Christ. Remember, “by their fruits ye shall know them ” (Matt. 7:20). The fruit of the Spirit in one’s life marks him as being victorious over the works of the flesh: “And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof” (Gal. 5:24; cf. 1 Pet. 4:1-2). The fruit we bear should identify us as being “of Christ Jesus,” not of the world (Gal. 5:19-21).

Thirdly, we understand that fruit must grow to maturity. We do not plant an apple true expecting ripened fruit to appear the next day. Spiritual fruit also takes time to develop and mature. We are often encouraged to grow to maturity or perfection in the New Testament (Acts 20:32; Phil. 3:13-14; Heb. 6:1; 1 Pet. 2:2). This growth occurs by obeying the word of God in our lives (Heb. 5:12-14). We all need diligence and patience as we grow in our faith and obedience. But, we must grow. Just as we cut down a fruit tree which never produces any fruit (Lk. 13:6-9), God will not accept us into heaven if our lives never bear fruit for him (2 Pet. 1:5-11). Is your fruit ripening?

By bearing the fruit of the Spirit, we show Christ to the world (Phil. 214-16). Is your fruit ripening or rotting?

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 23, p. 723
December 3, 1992

By Donald P. Ames

Recently I ran across the above quote, and think it deserves our consideration. Love has often been described as a “two-way street,” as well it should be. We have two different individuals coming from two different backgrounds, and meeting on the same territory. This is true in friendships, as well as marriage. To survive as “love,” it must be “without hypocrisy” (Rom. 12:9). Many a friendship and/or marriage has ended in disaster when one of the parties forgot it was a “two-way street,” and assumed it had become a “one-way highway” instead (in other words, and did not give in return). True love “does not seek its own” (1 Cor. 13:5; see also Jn. 3:16; 15:13).

As on any highway, sometimes we have dangers, with warning signs posted along the way. We may not heed or even notice those signs, but that does not minimize any of the dangers we may be approaching. It may be a “narrow bridge,” in which case we may be facing irritations or conflicts. In such cases, we may have to “yield the right of way” to avoid a real collision. Many make the mistake of assuming they can remake the other person (“we can make it there is plenty of room”), only to find out they had miscalculated. Rather than trying to remake, we ought to understand and cooperate. A “scratched fender” can leave a scar!

Others may be distracted and not notice the dangerous “curves” on the road. Paul warns us to “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18), as well as to be sure we keep on the road (Heb. 13:4, 1 Cor. 7:3). When we become careless, we are headed for a wreck! We expect the other “car” to stay in its lane, and must remember the same also goes for us!

“Dead end streets” and “head-ons” may be found by those who do not realize that driving is a serious business and demand all our attention. Love does not just “happen,” but is something we learn (Tit. 2:4), and we need to study “the rules of the road” (1 Cor. 13) frequently to be good drivers. A good driver abides by these “rules,” and expects other “cars” to do the same. This is what makes our highways safe and travelable, and gives us the confidence we can travel them. Yet, we need to drive “defensively” (taking care of our loved ones), and not over-reacting if others sometimes do become careless and goof off. Imitating their example will not help us establish good “driving” habits!

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 24, p. 743
December 17, 1992

By John Humphries

We have just recently returned from six weeks of gospel work in India. We sincerely appreciate your prayers and support of this effort for the Lord in that part of the world. Several sent funds for Bibles in the Telugu language. This was used to purchase over 800 Bibles for poor Christians. We also wrote, had translated into Telugu, and printed in India some 70,000 tracts for distribution among the people. We can always use help with this! Tracts keeps teaching after we are gone. We can never print too many. Many conversions come from the tract effort.

The trip went very well and we believe that much good was done. In various gospel meeting around the state of Anhra Pradesh in south India, we baptized 72 precious souls into Christ. We conducted several study classes for preachers n various places. William Beasley, Jerry Parks, Ed Brand, and I were in India during the months of September, October and November. We came at different times to the country and overlapped each other for continuity and comparing of notes. We worked in different districts in Andhra Pradesh in order to cover more territory and meet with the various congregations.

We will mention a conversion or two in order to give you idea of the efforts in India. One conversion involved a family of Brahmans which is the highest caste in India. This known as the priestly caste and in fact the husband in this family is a Hindu priest. The wife and two children, one 19 or 20-year-old girl and the other is a 12 or 13-year-old boy, obeyed the gospel at great cost. The woman threw the idols down the well when she turned from the pagan gods and committed herself to the true and living God. After she did this her Hindu priest husband promptly abandoned the family. Now she and the children are having to support themselves as they are able. Her Hindu family has turned their back on her and the children. Her faith and the faith the children are an inspiration to us. They have truly counted the cost!

Another story involved a young man in his early 20s who was also high caste. His family put great pressure on him when they learned that he was investigating the gospel of Christ. They tried to marry him off to a Hindu girl and also pressured him to go to the idol temple for puga (worship). Their threats and pressure did not stop him. After we studied with him, he was baptized into Christ. He will face many difficulties with his family and Hindu friends.

We could give many such stories of faith and dedication to the Lord that we have observed in India. The Christians in that Hindu country face many battles as they attempt to follow the Bible. Some lose their faith but most remain faithful to the Lord Jesus Christ.

I will mention another situation that develops often in India. A Telugu Baptist preacher wanted to study further with us after hearing us preach the truth in one of our gospel meetings. He told us that we were preaching the truth and that he desires to learn more. As a matter of fact, some of his members have already obeyed the gospel. He did not fight this as he said that we taught the Bible truth on conversion. He even attended their baptism! Some of the Indian preachers are continuing to study with him. I told him that I would be happy to study with him each time I returned to India. Doors like this are open many places in India but for how long, I cannot say.

Please allow me to say for the record and to prevent possible misunderstanding, that not one red cent of support was promised to this Baptist preacher (or anyone else)! To his credit, he never mentioned such to us. He does face severe financial hardship if he obeys the gospel; but we have promised him nothing material. He is struggling mightily at this time. Pray for him and the others mentioned in this report, please.

Thank you again for your help. God willing, I will return next year. Would you please consider helping us again? I will be happy to answer any questions concerning our work in India. Please let me hear from you.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 24, p. 741
December 17, 1992