Truth Magazine

By Steve Wolfgang

Footnote: Bernard A. Weisberger, “Reflections on the Dry Season,” American Heritage, May/June 1990, 28-30.

Through the years, there has been a useful body of pertinent research done by well-recognized historians on the general background of Prohibition.

For example, Bernard Weisberger, a nationally-recognized historian who writes a current-events column (“In the News”) for the popular historical journal American Heritage, recently addressed the widespread (niis)conception that Prohibition “didn’t work.” Among the facts cited by Weisberger are:

“Prohibition did reduce drinking. The average annual per capita consumption of alcohol by Americans of drinking age – that is, the total alcoholic content of all the beer, wine, and distilled spirits they consumed – stood at 2.60 gallons” in 1910. In 1934, after more than a decade of prohibition, Weisberger reports the per capita average of 0.97 gallons.

“Census Bureau studies show that the death rate from chronic or acute alcoholism fell from 7.3 per 100,000 in 1907” to “2.5 in 1932, Prohibition’s last year. Deaths from cirrhosis of the liver, one cause of which is alcohol abuse, dropped from 14.8 per 100,000 in 1907 to 7.1 in 1920 and never rose above 7.5 during the 1920’s. Economic studies estimated that savings and spending on household necessities increased among working-class families during the period, possibly from money that once went to drink.” These are not the propaganda of some biased zealot, but the factual report of a nationally-known historian. Furthermore, Weisberger reports that one reason why Prohibition may be commonly thought so unsuccessful is that even the above improvements were achieved with a minimum of enforcement. He continues:

“Drinking might have been cut back even further if more resources had been devoted to enforcement. In 1922 Congress gave the Prohibition Bureau only $6.75 million for a force of 3,060 employees (including clerical workers) to hunt for [violators] in thousands of urban neighborhoods, remote hollows, border crossings, and coastal inlets. State legislators were equally sparing: in 1926 state legislatures all together spent $698,855 for Prohibition work, approximately one eighth of what they spent on enforcing fish-and-game laws. Even so, by 1929 the feds alone had arrested more than half a million violators.”

Nor is this “new” information; a 1968 article by historian of science John C. Burnham of Ohio State University in the Journal of Social History revealed even more data along the lines Weisberger adduces. To imply that attempts to restrict alcohol sales can’t be effective ignores the available evidence. Professor Norman H. Clark’s 1976 study, Deliver Us From Evil, makes a persuasive cause that during Prohibition, arrests for drunkenness and alcohol-related crimes declined markedly.

Of course, a much earlier author reminds us across the ages that “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging, and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise” (Prov. 20:1).

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, p. 457
August 6, 1992

By Robert Wayne La Coste

Here we are in the year 1992 on the eve of another national election. To most if not nearly all Americans, there is a “ho-hum” atmosphere existent. There are probably a number of reasons for this. People are bored with politics, fed up with mud-slinging and in general ready to barbeque anyone who calls himself a politician. In a nation that prides itself on being a winner at everything, it looks like we are losers if not at least lost when it comes to government. While we are yet the richest nation that has probably ever existed on God’s earth, yet we have devised and patented certain evils and sins that would cause other nations both past and present to blush. No one kills more unborn children, treats more cases of drug abuse, and has a higher crime and divorce rate. Who says that bigger or richer means better?

Yet, while all of this is true, this writer certainly would not want to live anywhere else. We yet have a land where many freedoms and liberties exist that would not be afforded us if we resided elsewhere. May we never take these blessings for granted and may we ever thank our God for them.

It is all so easy to get discouraged by the apathy toward sin and evil. Even among those professing to be God’s children, this “ho-hum, bah-humbug” attitude toward government is prevalent. As a result, many Christians continue to sit idly by, while the devil makes more inroads into our society. It is not the purpose of this article to do anything but hopefully remind each of us of certain important truths about the Christian and “the powers that be.” These truths become especially important in an election year.

Render Unto Caesar

Jesus did not come to be an earthly king (Jn. 6:15; 18:36), yet he commanded personal responsibility to those who were in positions of government. When asked about paying taxes, Jesus promptly responded, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things which are God’s.” The Jews paid taxes to Rome (Lk. 2:1) and, like most of us, probably did not like the way their taxes were being spent, but this did not dismiss them from that responsibility.

Paul wrote about this also to the church at Rome: “render to all their dues; tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor” (Rom. 13:7).

A Christian’s Duty

Under our system of government we have certain privileges the Jews did not have. One of those is the right to vote. Judea, the home of the Jews, was ruled by Rome and as such, the Jews found themselves the servants of a tyrannical form of government. They had no say in who ruled them and certainly no voice in what laws were created or enacted.

I’m amazed that in a society which screams about “rights,” there is such apathy about voting. It seems reasonable, that when a person will not take a part in his government, he surely has no “beef” coming if he doesn’t like the way it is being run.

Every child of God should take advantage of every avenue afforded him for good. The ballot box is yet an important tool and can be used for good. We are the people who make up this government. We are the ones who send the honest or crooked politician to his respective office. We are the ones who can take him out. Government is to serve the people, not the other way around. Someone once said, that “all that is necessary for evil to prevail, is for enough good men to do nothing. ” Truer words were never spoken. As God’s peculiar people, we must be “zealous of good works” (2 Pet. 2:9). As a matter of fact, “he that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (Jas. 4:16). Surely it is good to accept and carry out our civic duty as a Christian. More than good however, it is a command of the Lord.

A Christian’s Influence

Many people are prone to think, “I’m just one person, my voice and vote are unimportant.” This defeatist attitude should never be in the heart of God’s sons and daughters. Many individuals who thought little of their power and influence changed the course of history. Their names are household words: Noah, Joseph, Moses and Jonah just to name a few. Noah stood above his generation and only he and his family “found grace in the eyes of the Lord” (Gen. 6:9). Joseph, though from humble beginnings, and in spite of being sold like an animal to be a slave, rose above his surroundings and became ruler over Egypt, second only to the King himself. Moses didn’t think himself powerful enough a speaker to take on the likes of Pharaoh, but God also was with him and he prevailed. Jonah surely was rebellious and did not want to obey God, but in finally submitting, he converted the entire city of Nineveh and turned them back to God’s way.

Don’t ever underestimate the power of your will, life and influence for evil or good! There is absolutely no one quite like you in the entire universe. Your manner of decision and subsequent speech, and conduct will always influence someone to either good or evil.

There are a hosts of evils the Christian must continue to battle in life. Many of these evils are now in the political arena. Some of the worst remain abortion, “legalized gambling,” vile sexual sins and in essence humanism that has not only gone to seed, but become full grown!

Fight Christian! Your greatest sword is still the word of God (Eph. 6:17; Heb. 4:12). However, the ballot box is also a sword. With both of these weapons let us “continue to fight the good fight of faith.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, pp. 460-461
August 6, 1992

By Larry Ray Hafley

(1) Often we are asked that if baptism is for the remission of sins, then why do we not baptize a child of God every time he sins? Those who ask the question think that it poses a dilemma for those of us who believe what Acts 2:38 says. So, if baptism is “for the remission of sins,” why not baptize a child of God every time he sins and seeks forgiveness?

Those who ask the question believe one should be baptized because his sins have been forgiven. When one is forgiven, he should be baptized “because of” the remission of sins, Now, turn their question back on them. If one is baptized because he is forgiven, why do you not baptize a child of God every time he sins and seeks forgiveness?

Baptists have argued this case for years. Since we teach that a sinner must be baptized to be saved and forgiven (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16), then when one sins as a child of God, why do we not have to baptize him again “for the remission of sins”? Well, they believe that one should be baptized “as an outward sign” of his forgiveness when he is saved. When their convert sins, repents and is forgiven, do they take him and baptize him again because his sins have been forgiven? No, they do not. When they explain why they do not baptize again a penitent brother of theirs, they ought to be able to see why we do not baptize a penitent child of God (Acts 8:22; 1 Jn. 1:9).

(2) Those who believe in the impossibility of apostasy argue that sins of the flesh, the outer man, do not affect the condition of the soul, the inner man. Hence, the inner, spiritual man, the soul, cannot be lost because of the deeds or sins performed by the flesh. A number of passages knock this idea in the creek (Matt. 15:18,19; 2 Cor. 7: 1; Col. 3:5,6; Eph. 5:3-6; Rom. 8:12,13; Gal. 5:19-21; 6:7,8).

However, two are especially simple, useful and easy to be understood. “Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul” (1 Pet. 2:11). Sins of the flesh do affect the soul. They “war against the soul.” Further, in 2 Corinthians 5:10, the Spirit saith, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that which he hath done, whether it be good or bad.” Could language be plainer? How, then, can Calvinists argue that sins of the flesh do not jeopardize the destiny of the soul?

(3) Catholicism says that the Lord gave prominence, preeminence and primacy unto Peter in Matthew 16:18,19. If that is true, the apostles and Zebedee’s wife did not know it. They argued over which of them should be considered the greatest in the kingdom (Matt. 18:1-3; 20:20-28; Lk. 9:46; 22:24). If the Lord had given Peter his papal primacy papers, nearly a year before Luke 22:24, why did he not simply settle the matter and remind them that he already had appointed the apostle Peter Pope in prospect? It would have been the logical thing to do if the Catholics are right about it. But, alas, they are not right. Jesus further blasted “Petrine” papal presumptions when he spoke of their pretensions of dominion and authority and said, “But it shall not be so among you.” In other words, the very thing that Catholics claim for Peter, his dominion and authority, Jesus said is “not so.”

(4) Pentecostal people cite Jesus’ words in John 14:12, “He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do.” Then they say that we must not be believers because we do not do the works or miracles of Jesus. If we were truly believers, we would do the works (miracles) of Jesus and even “greater works than” Jesus did. What shall we say to this?

First, Pentecostal preachers cannot do the works of Jesus. They cannot walk on water. I have tried to get them to take just one step across a baptistry (length-wise) by walking on the water, but they have never done so. They cannot feed 5,000 people with 5 loaves and 2 fish and take up 12 garbage bags of fragments. They cannot raise the dead. No, they cannot do the works of Jesus. Neither can they do “greater works than these.” Are they really believers?

Second, these promises are made to the apostles. They did the works of Jesus, as all of us, even our Pentecostal friends, admit (Acts 2:43; 3:6; 5:15, 16; 9:36-42; 14:3; 19:10). But what of those “greater works”? What are they? I purposely left off, because Pentecostals often do, the last clause of John 14:12. Jesus said, “He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.” Note it. Why were their works to be greater? “Because I go unto my Father.”

Jesus had to go unto the Father, “for if I go not away, the Comforter (“which is the Holy Spirit” – Jn. 14:26) will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you” (Jn. 16:7). The apostles will do “greater works than these,” “because I go unto my Father.” But Jesus went unto the Father so that the Holy Spirit would be sent to them. Hence, the “greater works” were tied to the coming of the Spirit. So, Jesus ascended to the Father. The Spirit came, guided the apostles into “all truth” and convicted “the world of sin, and of righteousness and of judgment” through them (Jn. 16:7,8,13; 17:20; Acts 2:36,37). These, therefore, are the “greater works.”

Third, “Oneness,” “Jesus only” Pentecostals had better not cite this verse. It has Jesus going unto His Father. That is two persons, or did he go unto himself? Jesus (that is one) went unto the Father (that is two), and he sent the Holy Spirit (that is three). Or did he go unto himself and send himself?

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, pp. 456-457
August 6, 1992

By Tom Roberts

The ministry of Jesus was inextricably connected to salvation. In fact, the very name given to him by the angel of God, “Jesus” (Lk. 1:31), is of Hebrew origin (Joshua) meaning: “Jehovah is Savior.” As Joseph was told, “it is he that shall save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). Not a Jewish rabbi, sociologist, revolutionary or confused dreamer, Jesus was the Christ, anointed of God, sent from heaven to “seek and save that which was lost” (Lk. 19:10).

The Book of Acts, describing the spread of salvation in the name of Jesus of Nazareth throughout the Jewish and Roman worlds, made no effort to disguise this theme of the apostles. The volume was not a social commentary, a comprehensive history of the day, nor an atlas of ancient civilizations. The thrust was plain and clear, without apology, but with sure defense against those who might have labeled its message bigoted and self-righteous. Quite clearly, the world was lost and salvation could be found only in the name of Jesus. “And in none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved” (4:12). This bold and distinctive message allowed no doubt, made no exceptions and permitted no quarter. Jesus was Savior and, without him, every man was eternally and irretrievably lost. Modern religions are embarrassed by such undisguised evangelism founded upon such exclusive claims. Most would be magnanimous and place Jesus among the company of “great” religious leaders like Muhammed, Buddha, or some other. But none of them is willing to grant to Jesus his rightful place as the only Savior. Without a moment’s hesitation, Luke declared the message of the apostles as one in complete harmony with the claims and ministry of Jesus. Its vision of Jesus was crystal clear, its clarion call rings from first century Rome to twentieth century America: Jesus, and only Jesus, saved!

Certified by the Resurrection

How could Luke and the apostles speak with such certainty? What gave them the assurance and boldness with which to declare salvation in the name of Jesus? Luke clearly showed that faith in Jesus was predicated on his resurrection from the dead. Having witnessed the resurrection (1:9), the apostles were not inclined to be quiet about the matter. Jesus had told them to witness (1:8), beginning at Jerusalem (Lk. 24:48) and, having receiving the Holy Spirit, they began to do so. The very first sermon under the Testament of Christ threw down the gauntlet: God sent Jesus, certified him by signs and wonders, you killed him, God raised him up (2:22-24). This was their explanation which remains ours today. Jesus died, was buried three days and nights, and rose from the dead. There is no salvation in any other for Muhammed and all others died, were buried and are still in the tomb. The conclusion of such evidence pointed to one truth: “Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified” (v. 36). Jesus, and only Jesus, has been certified by God.

“Turn the World Upside Down”

The first sermon resulted in 3000 souls obeying the gospel 44unto remission of sins” (2:38). Later, the number of men rose to 5000 (4:4), with many priests becoming obedient (6:7). The message continued to be: “Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that so there may come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord” (3:19).

Opposition, threatenings, beatings and imprisonment did not deter these men. Luke detailed that the disciples rejoiced that they were worthy to suffer for the name (5:41), and they “ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ” (v. 42).

Samaritans received the gospel (Acts 8:9-25), as did the eunuch from Ethiopia (8:26-40). Saul, the persecutor, became a believer (Acts 9,22,26) and, through him, people throughout Asia Minor (13:1-14:28) and Europe (15:36-21:15). Everywhere the message was the same: “Be it known unto you therefore, brethren, that through this man is proclaimed unto you remission of sins; and by him everyone that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (13:38,39). The Gentiles came under the same gospel (Acts 10,11,15) and efforts to turn the gospel of Christ into a “law/gospel” were soundly defeated. Salvation under the Law of Moses was based upon perfect law keeping, which, wrote James and the apostles, “put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we are able to bear” (15:10). Salvation in Christ was by “justification of faith,” a subject profoundly explored by Paul in his letters to the Romans, Galatians, etc. Judaizing teachers opposed the gospel and accused Paul of “turning the world upside down” (17:6).

The message of salvation, so beneficent and propitious, is controversial only to those who reject its wisdom and direction. To those “who are being saved, it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18), neither a stumbling block nor foolishness. But one can scarcely be indifferent to it. As someone said of Paul: “When he entered a town with the gospel, he started a church or a riot, and sometimes both.” On trial for his life before Agrippa, Paul tried to convert his judge, having this response: “With but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian” (26:28). One might not agree with the message, one might even fight against it, but one could not misunderstand: without Christ, you are lost. Felix was terrified by the message of judgment for sin (24:25), but sent Paul away.

Before Jews and Greeks, Romans and Ethiopians, slaves and masters, common people as well as kings and governors, the message of salvation was proclaimed. The whole world heard it (Col. 1:23). As Luke’s chronicle of the Acts came to a close, we see Paul in jail at Rome, pressing his case to all who would come to him: “Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness, none forbidding him” (28:31).

“Preach the Word”

It is an honor and a privilege to know that we are fellow laborers with these godly men and women in the proclamation of the same saving message. The power of the gospel (Rom. 1:16) has not diminished with years or distance; it still contains the same saving message. There is not one whit difference in the message of the first century Christians and that preached by faithful brethren today. The seed (Lk. 8:11) is the same; the harvest is the same, only the sowers are different. Perhaps we need to be less apologetic about preaching it. Perhaps we need to have more conviction of the rightness and distinctiveness of the message. Perhaps we should not be embarrassed by charges of bigotry and self-righteousness when we speak out. Perhaps we should be more aggressive and bold in attacking strongholds of error. But we have this assurance: wherever good and honest hearts are touched by the message of Jesus, sins will be forgiven and salvation will be granted. God is still “visiting the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name” (Acts 15:14). Let us pray to God that we be counted worthy to stand with the giants of past years and tell the world of saving grace. “Jesus saves! Jesus saves!”

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, pp. 454-455
August 6, 1992