Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

The teaching that the New Testament is a “love letter” rather than a code of law has the implication that the restoration plea is not valid because there is no pattern to be restored. Max Lucado was quoted by the Tulsa (OK) World as follows:

He said, “I have a gut feeling that we (the Church of Christ) have approached the Bible as an engineer, looking for a certain design or architectural code. And I think we find that everyone finds a different code. As a result, we split into 27-28 splinters or factions.

“There is no secret code. The Bible is a love letter as opposed to a blueprint. You don’t read a love letter the same way you read a blueprint” (quoted in Behold The Pattern by Goebel Music, 114).

By saying that the New Testament epistles are “love letters” rather than law, the writers imply that matters of revelation can be disobeyed without jeopardizing one’s soul. This teaching raises the question, “Is there a pattern to be restored?”

The Alternatives

There can only be one answer to the question posed. Either there is a pattern or there is not. If there are no patterns to be restored in the New Testament, there are no objective truths, no right or wrong ways to do anything in religion. All things are left to subjective judgment. If there are patterns revealed in the Bible, there are objective truths and those patterns must be respected. The conclusion then follows that all of the innovations and changes which have occurred since the first century must be carefully removed to return to the patterns of God’s word revealed in the Bible. The purpose of this article is to show that the New Testament does contain patterns for Christians to restore in the New Testament.

The Old Testament Patterns

The Old Testament was written “for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope” (Rom. 15:4). The Old Testament reveals patterns for God’s people to follow.

1. The story of Cain and Abel’s worship reveals that there was a pattern for worship from the beginning (Gen. 4). This familiar story reveals that Cain’s worship was not accepted by God. Whatever reason a person identifies for God rejecting Cain’s worship (whether it was not a blood sacrifice or it was offered with a wrong attitude, etc.) that reason identifies a pattern which had to be followed.

2. God gave Noah a pattern for building the ark (Gen. 6-8). The Lord revealed how the ark was to be built and Noah was expected to build the ark according to the divinely revealed pattern.

3. The Lord gave a pattern for the construction of the tabernacle and its furnishings (Exod. 25:9,40; 26:30). Noah was approved of God only when he built all things “according to the pattern shewed thee in the mount. ” The details were minutely revealed.

4. Nadab and Abihu sinned when they departed from the pattern (Lev. 10:1-2). When these two sons of Aaron brought “strange fire, which the Lord commanded not,” they were immediately stricken with fire for their sin.

5. King Jeroboam of Israel sinned in departing from the pattern of divinely revealed worship (1 Kgs. 12:26-33). Jeroboam departed from the pattern of divine worship by erecting graven images to worship God, erecting altars in Bethel and Dan, changing the priesthood so that men of all tribes could serve, and changing the feast day. The Lord plainly said about this apostasy, “This thing became a sin” (1 Kgs. 12:30).

6. The message of the prophets confirms that the Lord revealed a pattern by which Israel was to be governed. Jeremiah’s familiar words emphasize this truth: “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls” (6:16). The “old paths” were the revealed pattern for worship.

The Old Testament reveals that God gave a law or a pattern to govern his people in Old Testament times. Some admit that the Old Testament was a law governing God’s people but deny that the New Testament is a law for men today.

The New Testament Patterns

That the Lord has revealed patterns for the Lord’s church is evident from the following facts:

1. The Lord gave the apostles the task of revealing a pattern. The Lord sent the Holy Spirit to them to guide them into all truth (Jn. 16:13). They were to preach “all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matt. 28:20). Whatever they “bound” on earth was first bound in heaven and whatever they “loosed” on earth was first loosed in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19; 18:18). Consequently, the early church adhered to the “apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). What came from their hands should be passed down from generation to generation (2 Thess. 2:15; 2 Tim. 2:2).

2. Every commandment and instruction warning about false doctrine operates upon the presupposition that there is a uniform pattern of doctrine from which men are not to depart. The New Testament warns against false teachers (2 Pet. 2:1; Matt. 7:15). When Paul wrote about the worship assemblies, he said, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:37). He warned against departures from the revealed doctrine (Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Cor. 4:6; Rom. 16:17-18; cf. 2 Jn. 9-11).

3. There was uniformity in the teaching to every church. Paul wrote the “same things” to the Philippians that he wrote others (Phil. 3:1). To Corinth, he said that Timothy would teach his “ways, which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church” (1 Cor. 4:17). What he taught the Corinthians about giving on the first day of the week, he taught the churches in Galatia (1 Cor. 16:1-2). He laid down the same organizational arrangement in all churches (Acts 14:23; 1 Tim, 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-11; Phil. 1:1). Although the people were located in different geographical regions and cultures, all followed the same pattern.

4. The manner in which the kingdom is spread necessitates a divinely revealed pattern. The kingdom is spread through sowing the seed of the kingdom, the word of God (Lk. 8:11). The same seed produces the same fruit wherever and whenever it is sown.

5. The Lord has revealed a law for the kingdom (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2; Jas. 1:25). Passages which speak of “lawful” things imply the existence of a law (1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23). Passages which speak of “lawlessness” imply the existence of a law (Matt. 7:23; for many other passages, consult anomia in a Greek lexicon).

6. When men departedfirom the law, they were called to repentance. When the Corinthian fornicator departed from God’s revelation, he was called to repentance and the church was to withdraw from him if fie chose not to repent (1 Cor. 5:1-11). When false teachers at Ephesus were teaching “strange doctrines,” they were called back to the pattern of sound words (1 Tim. 1:3-10).

All of these passages imply the existence of a divinely revealed standard of authority from which men were not to depart. Calling men who have departed from God’s revealed word back to that standard of authority is what is meant by the restoration principle.

Problems of No-Patternism

No one can consistently apply his no-patternism. At some point or the other, all men revert to an appeal for patterns. We are hearing some who do not like the implications of a revealed pattern on the organization and work of the church say that there no patterns. However, these same men appeal to a pattern for worship when some of their own number began to seek fellowship with the Christian Church. Those who are seeking fellowship with the Christian Church will look for a pattern of conversion to tell the Christian Church that they cannot fellowship the pious unimmersed. The pious unimmersed who have a broad view of fellowship will appeal to the pattern of God’s word to argue that homosexuals cannot be ordained to the ministry. The broad-minded evangelicals will appeal to the pattern of New Testament authority to argue that ecumenical fellowship with pagan religions is wrong. Most ecumenicals are not willing to extend fellowship to humanists and other atheists.

At some point, every person who claims allegiance to King Jesus is forced to admit that there is a pattern. The alternative is moral relativism – everything is acceptable to God. Antinomianism, libertine belief, is self-contradictory and wrong.

Conclusion

There is a divinely revealed word of God which governs the worship, organization, terms of admission, moral conduct, etc. of the Lord’s people, his church. Departures from that revelation are sinful. The restoration plea calls men back to that divinely revealed standard.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 11, pp. 322, 328
June 4, 1992

By Randy Cavender

Campaign America! If you have not heard of it before, let me assure you that it is not the current presidential campaign. It is another effort by churches of Christ across this country in the name of religion to preach the gospel of Christ. For several months now I have received information concerning this new television show that went on the air earlier this year. It is interesting to note several things about this work that are in violation of God’s pattern of work for the church in the New Testament! Let us study this new effort and see if it fits into God’s pattern!

God’s Pattern!

We first need to realize that God does have a pattern of work for the church. Over the years many have tried to deny this. If there were no pattern, we would have an “anything goes” type of religion. But the Bible teaches that we must do all things by the authority of Christ (Col. 3:17). Furthermore, God has always had a pattern wherein he accomplished his purpose (Exod. 25:9,40; 26:30; Heb. 8:5). Even so, God’s pattern for Christians is found within his will. Paul admonished Timothy, “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:13). It is important that God’s people insist on maintaining the pattern which God has given!

God’s Pattern for the Work of the Church!

Since God has instructed us to “hold fast the pattern of sound words” there must be a guide which we can follow. When one studies the New Testament concerning the work of the church, he will find that the church is to do its work within the confines of the local congregation! Regarding evangelism, we find that the local church was responsible for preaching the gospel. The church is the “pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). We further note that there is not one example of an organization above or beyond the local church that did this work! Notice some scriptural examples.

Antioch

“Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away” (Acts 13:1-3).

Philippi

“Now you Philippians know also that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church shared with me concerning giving and receiving but you only. For even in Thessalonica you sent once and again for my necessities” (Phil. 4:15,16).

Thessalonica

“For from you the word of the Lord has sounded forth, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place. Your faith toward God has gone out, so that we do not need to say anything” (1 Thess. 1:8).

Each of these congregation did its own work! They did not send their contributions to a missionary society or a sponsoring church in order to accomplish their God-given mission! Each church sent to the preacher directly, in this case the apostle Paul. Moveover, these congregations did their own work! They did not solicit contributions for a work beyond their capability. Hence, any organizational work of evangelism beyond the local church is in violation of God’s law and is a sin (1 Jn. 3:4).

Furthermore, we find that the elders of each local church were to oversee the flock of which they were a part! Note these examples:

Ephesus

“Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which he purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:28-29).

Moreover, the apostle Peter instructed the elders to shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by constraint but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly” (1 Pet. 5:2). Elders are to oversee the work of which they are a part. When elders take the oversight of more than one congregation, they violate the pattern that God has given, which is sin (1 Jn. 3:4).

Kind reader, with these Scriptures firmly in our minds, let us investigate Campaign America and see if it fits the pattern that God has given in his word!

Campaign America

First of all, Campaign America is a violation of the patterns that we have studied thus far. For example, we find that this work depends on the contributions of more than one congregation in order to function! In the words of the Hillsboro elders: “The Hillsboro elders are asking congregation across the brotherhood to schedule special contributions in 1992” (Vol. II, No. 1; Special Contributions Requested). Furthermore, they say “The key to Campaign America’s success is local congregations’ financial involvement. And yes, individual Christians’ involvement. Without both, Campaign America will not be as effective as it can be” (Vol. II, No. 1; Your Involvement is Vital). Thus, this work depends on more than one local church! Yet, this goes beyond the pattern of the New Testament with each local church doing its own work in preaching the gospel!

Again, we see that the eldership of the Hillsboro church of Christ in Nashville, Tennessee is the overseer of this work! Are they not overseeing the work of other churches? Are they not taking oversight of more than God has allowed? Mr. Bill Johnson said, “Campaign America is not a Hillsboro church program. Rather, it is a brotherhood program” (Vol. II, No. 1, A Message From the Field). Where in the New Testament can one find an example of a “brotherhood program” which is overseen by the elders of one local church?

Let us look for a moment at the work that Campaign America plans to do! “Campaign America is an evangelistic outreach which has strong involvement and benefit to local churches of Christ” (Vol. II, No. 1, 5-Point Plan Benefits Local Churches). Of their stated goals, one really sticks out to me above all the rest, that is, their targeted audience. “Campaign America is targeted to reach people ages 35-55 who are searching for God” (Vol. II, No. 2, Campaign America Targets Its Audience). Brethren in Christ, the Bible teaches all responsible men and women regardless of age who are in need of the gospel. Now I am sure that Campaign America would not turn down the opportunity to teach one who is not found in their “targeted audience,” but this does not go far enough! These individuals are allowing the changing world to change what God has commanded. God’s “targeted audience” is every creature. Jesus said, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” Thus, their program of evangelism takes away from God’s pattern those to whom we are to take the gospel of Christ!

Brethren, over the years, men have come up with missionary societies, sponsoring churches such as Herald of Truth, One Nation Under God and now Campaign America and other gimmicks which are not authorized in God’s word. These works, no matter how noble they may be, are in violation of God’s Divine Word! Practicing such works is sin (1 Jn. 3:4) and they will be ultimately rejected by our Heavenly Father (Matt. 7:21-23). Campaign America is not in harmony with God’s pattern of evangelism found in the New Testament. Will you not return to the pattern that God has given and do what he has said his way?

“Thus says the Lord” ‘Stand in the ways and see, and askfor the oldpaths, where the good way is, and walk in it,- then you will find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it (Jer. 6:16).

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 10, pp. 304-306
May 21, 1992

By Daniel H. King

Fornication has always been a sin, not only against God and holiness, but also against one’s own body. Throughout this period of sexual madness that our nation and the world has been experiencing, that is one fact which has been largely ignored. Paul noted this in making his argument against the licentious ways of the Corinthians: “Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body; but he who commits immorality sins against his own body” (1 Cor. 6:18).

According to Paul’s observation, no sin quite so intimately requires the total involvement of the physical anatomy as does immorality. Additionally, it puts the body completely at risk. The Bible attests that from very early times God has associated this sin with danger and even death. The twenty-fifth chapter of Numbers tells how the Israelites “began to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab” (v. 1), and “Israel joined himself unto the Baal of Peor. ” Canaanite religion was a fertility cult and was inherently sexual in nature. People worshiped Baal and Asherah by means of union with cultic prostitutes (both male and female). There is ample attestation of this in the Scripture itself and also in outside sources such as the cuneiform texts from Ras Shamra, the excavated city of Ugarit, on the coast of Syria. Israel was tempted to join in with the worship and did so to his hurt. Immorality is dangerous! The Bible tells how Moses and the priests struck down some who engaged in this evil. But, almost in a footnote, it ends the story of the incident with these words: “And those that died by the plague were twenty and four thousand.” Imagine that! Twenty four thousand persons perished by a plague because of their immorality! Undoubtedly this plague was some sort of sexually transmitted disease. The brothel/shrine at Peor was not a safe place to visit!

Our young people need to be constantly warned that there is danger in sexual sin. While God has blessed the marital union (Heb. 13:4 – “the marriage bed is undefiled”), he has cursed pre- and extra-marital involvements: “fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Heb. 13:4b). Too many of our foolish intellectual leaders are attempting to salvage their so-called “sexual revolution” by encouraging “safe sex,” i.e. sex with a protective condom. In reality, the only “safe sex” is that between two persons who are married and faithful to one another. We who believe Scripture must not hesitate to remind ourselves and others that the curse of God is upon those who commit sexual sin. Even if one takes the risk and gets lucky (does not contract a disease or seems not to pay the price of this folly), still the wages of sin is ultimately death (Rom. 6:23). It spells spiritual death now, and eternal separation from God in the world to come, regardless of the present physical repercussions or lack of them.

But those physical consequences may only be ignored at fantastic risk to one’s health and happiness. At this stage in our history venereal diseases are running rampant. Gonorrhea, syphilis, chancroid, lymphogranulorna venereum, granuloma inguinale, nongonococcal. urethritis (chlamydial infection), hepatitis infection (hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and “non-A, non-B” hepatitis), venereal warts (human papillomavirus), venereal herpes (herpes genitalis), acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), etc, are all threats to public health. Herpes and AIDS are incurable; AIDS is always fatal. Contrary to public opinion, curing these diseases is not easy for the scientific community, nor is the solution merely to throw unlimited funds into research (as many in the homosexual community seem to think, especially with reference to AIDS; besides, why should the U.S. taxpayer be forced to pay for the socially irresponsible behavior of a few?). Not only are the causative organisms in these various diseases different structurally but they also represent distinct classes of micro-organisms: spirochetes, cocci, bacilli, and viruses. Hepatitis is a virus. It is not specifically a venereal disease, but is spread through sexual intimacy with infected persons. It can be fatal, lead to chronic hepatitis or even cirrhosis of the liver. Herpes and AIDS are also viral organisms, and so are the most difficult to prevent or interdict with medication. To date it has proven impossible to eradicate these various diseases because they are constantly being transmitted to new hosts by sexual activity of infected persons, knowingly or unknowingly.

The AIDS virus in particular strikes fear in the hearts of even the most casual in their views toward sexual “freedom.” The slow and excruciating death, punctuated by debilitating infections and unrelenting cancerous tumors, and the knowledge that there are no survivors, should be sufficient to give anyone pause before considering a “casual sexual encounter.” It seems that in this mysterious virus God has created a scourge worthy of the plague at Peor – calculated to punish those who have no respect for his Law!

Except in rare cases, there is no reason for the moral person to fear these deadly venereal plagues. The Lord has made a way to protect his people from such. In their faithfulness to God and their marital partner, or through simple self-control, Christians guard themselves from these infestations. As Jehovah said in the Old Testament, “the Lord will . . . afflict you with none of the terrible diseases of Egypt, which you have known” (Deut. 7:15). On the other hand, if we yield to immoral behavior, we should be forewarned that “he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption” (Gal. 6:8). As Moses warned Israel: “Then the Lord will bring upon you and your descendants extraordinary plagues – great and prolonged plagues – and serious and prolonged sicknesses . . . and they shall cling to you” (Deut. 28:59-60).

The irresponsible mass media, in particular television and modern popular music, treats these very real dangers mostly as if they did not exist. Dramatic presentations have movie heroes like James Bond hopping from bed to bed with one beautiful woman after another, seemingly without consequences. Many young people have already discovered, to their frightened dismay, that this is how babies are conceived (though it is seldom so in the movies). Song lyrics make unlawful sexual encounters sound wistfully romantic. Again, however, they totally ignore the real-life implications of such doings. America’s spiraling illegitimacy rate attests to the fact that conception and birth are still the very natural result of heterosexual intimacy. Abortion, with its mental and physical scarring, is the stop-gap measure invented to rid our lives of these children conceived in “one night stand, non-committal relationships.

And then there are the diseases! We must not forget those diseases! Hollywood seems to, except when doing some concert on behalf of its AIDS victims. And even then the most its leading lights can contribute is a few dollars, a warning against “unprotected sex,” and more railing against the government for not somehow relieving us of this scourge. Dear friend, the only way we are going to put a halt to this AIDS epidemic is if we again respect the law of the Lord and limit sexual activity to the normal, male-female, marriage relationship. Otherwise, it will run its course when it has killed off, in toto, those infected with the virus. Do not be unwise enough to be one among them! It may be many years before some researcher stumbles upon the key that will unlock the mystery of a cure for this awful disease. If that happens, the many other serious health and life threatening side-effects of immorality will not have gone away.

We must know, even today, that “he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body” (1 Cor. 6:18). If we are guilty of this sin, we are not only transgressing an ordinance of Heaven, but we are hurting ourselves, potentially destroying our own bodies!

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 11, p. 322, 329
June 4, 1992

By Mike Willis

In the following pages appears a discussion between Roger Jackson of Somerville, Alabama and Weldon Warnock of Beavercreek, Ohio on the issue of church support of benevolent Institutions. Brother Jackson affirms their right to exist and brother Warnock denies. I thought a word of introduction to the discussion would be appropriate.

The 1 August 1991 issue of Guardian of Truth contained a report of the Thrasher-Jackson debate in northern Alabama, The report was written by Wayne Greeson, Brother Jackson sent me a five-page reply to that report for publication in Guardian of Truth. When I refused to publish the report because It would lead to a debate over a review of a debate, I offered brother Jackson opportunity to defend his practice in the pages of Guardian of Truth. Later, he sent me a transcription of one item he felt he had been misrepresented on and I published the transcription along with a few comments.

Our correspondence and telephone conversation led to an agreement for three discussions to be published in Guardian of Truth, The discussions were to occur in this order: (a) Brother Jackson would defend the church support of benevolent Institutions; (b) Brother Warnock would defend the saints only proposition; (c) Brother Jackson would defend the church support of colleges. This first discussion is the beginning of the fulfillment of this agreement.

In providing for this discussion, I tried to get brother Jackson to arrange for some paper which circulates among his brethren to carry the discussion as well. He was unable to find one.

On February 8, 1992, offer the discussion had already begun, brother Jackson wrote me about his affirming the third proposition of this discussion. He said, 1 cannot affirm what, to me, is an endorsement of the colleges in our brotherhood. I do not know of a one that I would endorse as worthy of either individual or collective support, I believe they have taken the brethren’s money and then stabbed them in the back. They support false teachers and deny the brethren one, word of criticism.” He went on to state that he had not studied the church support of colleges question sufficiently to feel comfortable debating the issue. Consequently, there will be no discussion of the church support of colleges.

Despite my dissatisfaction with some aspects of this discussion, such as it not being published by a paper circulating among our liberal brethren, the truth has nothing to hide, We are happy to have our readers read both sides of this and any other Issue. I ask that each of our readers give careful attention to what both disputants have written and “search the Scriptures” to see if the things taught are so.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 11, p. 330
June 4, 1992