Truth Magazine

By Jerry Parks

Through the generosity of many, another preaching trip to the Philippines, has been accomplished. Brother John Humphries was my traveling companion again this year. Brother Humphries and I have been working together on such preaching trips since 1986. 1 could not ask for a better co-laborer in the gospel. John is a veteran of many trips overseas and knows what he is doing. His teaching is rich and powerful and he is an encouragement everywhere he goes. We enjoy our time together but because we can accomplish more by going in different directions, we actually spend very little time together. We simply touch base with one another from time to time to make sure that all is well.

With each trip overseas to the Philippines and other third world countries, it seems to get more and more difficult and takes longer to recuperate. But with each trip, I can see more and more the value of such efforts and especially the need to continue making such trips. I feel confident that we are becoming well adopted to the ways and needs and problems of the Filipino brethren. Each year we meet and become better acquainted with more and more of the brethren. Each year we have opportunity to work with and stay in the homes of those who are striving to preach Christ in that difficult part of the world. Most of the brethren seem comfortable when we’re in their presence. The novelty and tension of an American in their midst seems to have subsided. The brethren seem more at ease and willing to concentrate as we conduct Bible classes and give advice in trying to help them solve problems that exist between brethren.

We spent the first week together conducting classes at brother Ben Cruz’s house in Manila. The national elections which were underway when we arrived, kept us from doing any real traveling till after May 11th. While at Manila, John taught a series of lessons on the book of Daniel and I presented a series of lessons on the seven churches of Asia.

On May 12th John continued his studies in Manila while I traveled by bus to Hagonoy for a visit with the Agulto family. Two were baptized there, then the next day I traveled by bus to Tarlac (the Mt. Pinatubo area) where I had an opportunity to conduct classes morning, noon, and evening in the home of brother Dominador Arcega at. San Felipe. I spent one week there and seven more were baptized. I also had opportunity to visit with brethren in five other congregations while staying in the home of brother Arcega.

After my stay in Tarlac District I returned to Manila and traveled with brother Ben Cruz to Pampanga District. Ben had converted a man shortly before that time who was from that village. The man returned to his home place and told the others about the pure gospel of Christ. When we arrived, the entire village was eagerly waiting our arrival. Included in that number was a denominational preacher who questioned me for hours after I had finished preaching about the one true church. Consequently, he and a number of the others in the village were baptized when brother Humphries returned to that location the following week. Stories like that make the trip worthwhile, no matter how many discomforts one must endure.

On May 21st I made a quick trip to Olongapo (Subic Bay) to follow up and verify some relief efforts for the Mt. Pinatubo victims. By this time brother Humphries had departed for a one week stay in Malaysia (Borneo) to visit with several newly established congregations. Early on the morning of May 23rd, I flew to Davao City on the Island of Mindanao in the southern most part of the Philippines. While there, I stayed in the homes of brother Juanito Balbin and with brother Joy Notarte. While in that area I traveled to at least nine remote congregations traversing difficult mountain terrain through Mt. Apo, Davao Del Sur and Digos areas. These trips were made in Joy Notarte’s Volkswagon “Bug.”

On. May 27th I was joined by brother Humphries and we traveled in a Jeepney owned by brother Mainbog to Kidapawan in North Cotabato. Half way there the drive shaft fell apart and we were stranded till we could hitch a ride on another jeepney. We finally arrived at the home of brother Manibog. The next day we visited five congregations before returning by Jeepney to Davao.

On May 29th we traveled by boat to Samal Island and preached and visited brethren for several hours before returning to the home of brother Notarte to pack for our return flight to Manila.

We arrived in Manilla just in time to participate in the wedding of Teresa Cruz who was marrying a young man she personally converted from Catholicism.

In all, there were 25 baptisms that took place while we were on this trip. Many Bible classes for preachers and other interested people were conducted. Several disputes were settled and we were able to provide some much needed financial help to needy saints. That included buying food for drought victims, buying eye glasses, medicine, clothing, as well as repairing fishing boats and other equipment so brethren could once again start making a living. The drought victims living in the Davao Del Sur area have been especially hard hit and are suffering greatly. Their crops are a disaster and they have had to eat the rice that was needed for replanting, Now many are not only suffering from the lack of food and water, but also suffering from disease and sickness that always follows from such a severe drought. They are desperately in need of food and medicine and have no money to purchase such necessities. Filipino brethren from other areas are trying to help, but they need much more. I would be happy to give you the names and addresses of those to contact if you could help.

Once again, I express my appreciation to all those who make such trips possible. If I can supply you with more information about any of these matters, I would be happy to do so.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 16, pp. 494-495
August 20, 1992

By Carol R. Lumpkin

Becoming a Christian is one of the honored privileges all alien sinners have offered to them. This is accomplished only when the sinner is obedient to God’s power to save, the gospel of Jesus Christ (Rom. 1:16). There are some who claim to be Christians, yet the gospel has not been obeyed; in fact most do not know what the requirements of the gospel are. Christians are people who have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine (Rom. 6:17-18; 6:3-4). People in the first century A.D. who followed Christ were his disciples, Those disciples were first called Christians at Antioch (Acts 11:216). This was the new name the prophet Isaiah said they were to be called (Isa. 62:2).

Just because a person is religious (those in Athens were – Acts 17), just because a person is good morally (Cornelius was – Acts 10:2), just because a person claims Jesus as his savior (denominationalists do), just because a person attends worship some place (must worship in the proper spirit according to truth – Jn. 4:24), by no means concludes said person to be a Christian. If the above be true, then God would view a person as a Christian while practicing most anything. This is not the nature of God at all. Peter said, “Of a truth I perceive that God is not a respecter of persons: but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness is accepted with him” (Acts 10:34-35). If it was essential for both the Jews and Greeks to obey the gospel in the first century to be saved (it was), then it is likewise necessary for all alien sinners to obey the same gospel to be saved today.

All saved people are disciples of Christ, Christians. We know that we Christians may and do sin. “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us” (1 Jn. 1:8, 10). If a Christian leaves Jesus and his word for the world (sin), he ceases to be a Christian, a follower of Christ. “For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world” (2 Tim. 4:10). Was Demas still a Christian? No! Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3). Where they still Christians? No! Hymenaus and Alexander made shipwreck of their faith (1 Tim. 1:19-20). Where they still Christians? No!

When a saved individual turns his back upon the Lord and his word, he errs from the faith (Heb. 3:12), when a Christians departs the living God (Heb. 3:12), when a Christian falls away from God, abides not in the doctrine of Christ (2 Jn. 9), he cannot be a Christian while abiding in that lost state. The door is open for his confession (1 Jn. 1:9), repentance and prayer (Acts 8:22). Without doing the above he will never be a Christian again.

I often hear a preacher say, “If you are already a Christian and have sin in your life you need to confess, repent and pray.” The fact of the matter when a person has sin in his life he is not a Christian. A Christian is one who is in covenant relationship with God. When one ceases to follow Christ he is not a disciple of Christ, nor is he a Christian in the truest sense of truth.

Words are vehicles of thought. We must be ever so careful as to not leave the impression in the minds of those we teach that one is still a Christian while being in sin. Christians are saved people, those who follow the Lord.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 16, p. 495
August 20, 1992

By Leslie Diestelkamp

Question: In this, the middle of the Twentieth Century, has the Lord’s church out-grown controversy? Of course there are some who do engage in controversy. Some may do so only for the sake of controversy, and others may do so out of pure motives. Some may be fighting for self, and some may desire to stand in defense of truth. Many may engage in controversy with a kind and gentle spirit, while others may do so with a spirit of bitterness and malice.

However, the usual cry is “Peace, peace. ” Sometimes this is a cry for “Peace at any price.” It seems that some of the Lord’s people would rather have peace than to have truth and right if these can only be had in and through controversy. Some seem to be ashamed of an argument about the Scripture and have become so completely overwhelmed by pacifism that they will allow a soul to be lost in ignorance rather than earnestly discuss the Bible with him and they will allow the church to be led into error rather than “contend earnestly for the faith” (Jude 3) with brethren.

This spirit of non-controversy manifests itself in several ways, some of which we shall mention.

Be Altogether Positive

A few deny that there is value in negative teaching. Many minimize the value of such. Perhaps a majority simply overemphasize the positive, and thus de-emphasize the negative. It is not my intention to suggest that our teaching should be of a negative nature most of the time. Rather, the essence of the gospel of Christ is a positive message, and the one who teaches truth will not fail to devote most of his time, energy and ability to the proclamation of the high and holy demands of the positive word. On the other hand, the preacher or teacher who avoids the negative, will fail to impress upon his hearers (or readers) the whole truth, and those who give heed to what he teaches will undoubtedly fail to harmonize their lives with the will of God, and will evidently receive a false conception of the gospel.

When the negative is minimized the following things, at least, will result: (1) The use of mechanical instruments of music in worship will become a matter of little concern, even to people who worship where such are not used. This is seen by those of us who live in large cities, who observe the action of Christians who come from faithful churches but who drift (and sometimes gladly plunge) into the Christian Church when they move. The church where the mechanical instrument is not opposed openly and frankly and often is due for a rude awakening as soon as many of its members leave the home community. (2) Dancing, petting, drinking intoxicants, etc. will characterize the lives of members of the church even if they are taught to “keep thyself pure” and to “keep oneself unspotted from the world.” By being completely positive it is probably impossible to get youngsters to see any sin in dancing. If gospel preachers follow the lead of denominational preachers, and confine their lessons on moral matters to entirely positive messages, we can expect the Lord’s people to condone dancing and petting because they do not oppose lasciviousness, and to overlook lasciviousness because they do not actually abhor fornication!

To be positive is fine and is in harmony with truth. To be altogether positive (or altogether negative either) is to be wrong and unscriptural. A proper balance in preaching and teaching (and in our attitude) will enable us to attain that which God expects and to avoid that which he condemns. Let us beware if our own attitude is one that causes us to be displeased with negative teaching. Even a casual reading of the New Testament will enable us to see that, though its message for us is primarily a positive one, much of its instruction for us is couched in negative language. Let us also be aware that a denial of the proper value of negative teaching is an almost certain indication of the influence of modernism in our religion.

Consider Only One Side

Another angle of the non-controversial idea is to refuse to hear, read or allow to be presented, both sides of a matter. For instance, often some brother expresses great admiration for a certain paper published by brethren, explaining that he likes it so much because it doesn’t allow controversy upon its pages. The fact of the matter is that usually that paper may be almost filled with controversial material, but that it will only print one side of such controversy. It is not at all uncommon for a paper which is styled as noncontroversial, but which really is one-sided, to have perhaps five articles, three or four of which are highly controversial. Yet some brethren are made happy because there is no argument (they say) in it. But whoever gives a reason for his beliefs, presents an argument. However the tendency toward pacifism today, among Christians, causes many to insist that only one side of an argument be presented.

When we refuse to consider both sides of an argument, we are like the proverbial ostrich, and such a closed-mind policy will likely cause us, at times to be the blind one whom another blind one leads. The only safe course is to allow every issue to be tested in open discussion, either orally or printed; for the lesson that does not challenge the opponents of truth has missed its mark, and the one that cannot stand thorough investigation does not deserve serious consideration.

Brethren everywhere lament the action of denominational people who refuse to openly discuss issues, but at the same time such brethren will often refuse to give consideration to those issues that prevail among God’s people. Furthermore, when brethren do have discussions with denominational people, they do so without malice, usually, and stoutly affirm their friendship for those with whom they differ. Yet, significantly, when brethren differ they usually manifest a spirit of ill-will that borders upon hate for one another.

It is my intention herein to beg for two things: (1) Open, frequent and candid discussion of those things that trouble brethren; (2) and a spirit of brotherly kindness, compassion and patience in such discussions, whether they be oral or written.

The Test of Controversy

The Holy Spirit says, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thess. 5:21). But how can a thing actually be proved without controversy of some kind? The actual controversy may be one that only rages in our mind, when we place one argument against another, or it may be a friendly discussion between friends and/or brethren. On the other hand, a thing may sometimes best be proved true or untrue by public, oral discussion, or by written debate. At any rate that which we read or hear, and believe without a fair and accurate test, is only an assumption. And, to assume such to be truth is to risk our soul’s destiny upon uncertainty. The only fair and safe course, in view of our never-dying soul and of the eternal reward or punishment, is to be sure that all that we believe and practice is adequately, advisedly and ambitiously tested in the crucible of controversy.

To refuse controversy is usually not a sign of humility but of weakness, and to decline controversy may be an indication of cowardice rather than meekness. The supposed sweet spirit of non-controversy breeds ignorance, prejudice and bigotry. By-products of this attitude will be compromise, sectarianism and apostasy.

There are those who count the baptisms reported today and boast of accomplishments in this new day when debate is unpopular and when an argument is discouraged. They say that we have arrived at the time when those things are not needed to get results. It is affirmed that the church is growing more and more than ever before in modern times, and all of this without the controversy of former days. However we should always keep in mind that experts in that field say that from 80 to 90 percent of the baptisms today come from the Bible study classes. This simply means that most “growth” today is from families already in the church, and that little progress, comparatively, is being made toward converting people of the denominational world. It can hardly be denied that fewer denominational people are being converted today than in the early days of the restoration. Why? Could not one reason be that there is less controversy with them? Furthermore, take note of successes in foreign field: Where have greatest successes been seen? Usually, and with perhaps a few exceptions like Nigeria, by far the greatest success is in the place where opposition has been great and therefore controversy has been a prominent part of the work. The work in Italy is a real example of this, for there, under the stress and strain of argument and discussion, hundreds have been baptized who have remained faithful, indicating real conviction which was usually produced in the face of strong opposition. On the other hand, if one wants to see an exhibit of weakness, it may usually be easily found in those places where baptisms have not been preceded by long, hard struggles with conscience, with conviction, and with truth.

Disagree Without Being Disagreeable

The non-controversial spirit which, in some places, is choking all the vitality, vim and vigor out of the Lord’s church, may simply be the result of a mis-conception – supposition that those who differ must divide and that when we disagree we must be disagreeable. Some people forbid controversy because they say love forbids it. However, this is shallow thinking. In the first place, real love for a person demands that we get the truth to that person if at all possible, even if we do take the chance of losing his friendship. Furthermore, love for truth requires that we declare it firmly, fully and faithfully. To keep back part of the truth is to make the remaining part a lie. Likewise, that truth which is declared in a compromising spirit is a weakened, diluted and, at least to a great extent, an impotent truth.

If the church must grow without constant controversy, then it must cease to follow the greatest controversialist of all time, Jesus Christ. His every thought, word and deed brought him into open and severe conflict with Satan and Satan’s servants. If the followers of Christ today find themselves in less conflict than he, perhaps it is because they do not possess the “spirit of Christ,” which spirit will motivate lives and words everyone of which will be an open challenge to Satan and Satan’s servants.

Let us then take “The sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God,” and fight faithfully the good fight of faith, with fidelity.

(These words by brother Diestelkamp, whose positive contribution to the cause of Christ cannot be successfully denied, are just as relevant in 1992 as they were when they first appeared in Truth Magazine in November 1957.)

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 16, pp. 496-497
August 20, 1992

By Steve Wolfgang

Footnote: Richard John Neuhaus, ed. Theological Education and Moral Formation (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992), pp. 146-147.

Richard John Neuhaus, editor of the conservative journal First Things, also edits the Encounter Series of volumes published by Eerdmans, of which this is volume 15. Readers of this journal might also be interested in other volumes in the series, particularly volume 2 (Unsecular America) and volume 5 (The Bible, Politics, and Democracy).

Typically, each volume reports a conference in which four to six featured speakers delivered prepared addresses, following which those speakers and perhaps a dozen others joined in a panel discussion of the issues raised in the prepared speeches.

This particular volume reports a conference at Duke University and offers some rare insight into the state of the denominational mentality in America, and I offer excerpts from three different sections of the round-table discussion for your amazement.

Philip Turner, Dean of Berkeley Divinity School, Yale University, speaking of the crisis of authority in the Episcopal church:

“My wife is a priest. In her diocese recently there was another priest who got into New Age channeling. One day she announced that her particular spirit had informed her that Jesus didn’t really die; he married a druid princess, and they had a little druids. This was the content of this priest’s teaching to a group in her church, The senior warden of the parish thought that maybe something was wrong, so he called the bishop. The bishop, bless his heart, told the priest that she had three choices: she could recant, she could resign her orders, or she could undergo a heresy trial. Well, the bishop is the one who took the flak, because the dominant reaction was, ‘We’re Episcopalians, so we can believe what we want, and a bishop has no rights here.”‘

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 16, p. 490
August 20, 1992